C.  2.«,.'02J 


Srom  t^e  fetfitarj?  of 

(J)rofe66ot  n3?ifftam  J^^^^  (Breen 

Q^equeaf^e^  Bg  ^im  to 
f  ^  feifirarg  of 

(Princeton  C^eofo^icaf  ^eminatrg 

.L3F6 


SPIRIT 


OF    THE 


Biblical  Legislation, 

IN   PARALLEL   WITH 

TALMUD,  MORALISTS,  CASUISTS,  NEW  TESTAMENT, 

ANCIENT  AND  MODERN  LAW;  ESPECIALLY 

THE  SOCIAL  AND  POLITICAL 

INSTITUTIONS. 

■'  / 

REV.  MAURICE  FLUEGEL, 

LECTURER  IN   BALTIMORE,  HD. 

Author  oe  "Religious  Rites  and  Views;"  "Diet  and  Hygiene;" 
"Reply  to  Professor  Fr.  Delitzsch  ;"  "Germany,"  etc. 


BALTIMORE: 

Press  of  The  Sun  Book  and  Job  Printing  Office. 

1893. 


Copyright  Secured  by  the  Author. 
1893. 


CONTKNTS 


Part   I. 


Spirit  of  Biblical  Legislation — Sco2)e  of  the  hooh 1 

The  Biblical  Legislation — Sinai 6 

Cardinal  Principles — Liberty,   Equality,   Wealth,  Solidarity.  7 

Herbert  Spencer  on  that 10 

Man's  Freedom — A  Biblical  Doctrine 11 

Status  of  Woman  in  the  Bible 13 

Eve  and  Pandora — Christianity  and  Woman 14 

Civil  Freedom-Laws  in  Pentateuch 16 

State  and  Citizenship — State  elsewhere 18 

Biblical  Democracy 20 

Prophets  and  Tribunes — Leaders  and  Orators 21 

Biblical  and  Non-Biblical  State — The  Citizen 24 

Biblical  Patriotism — Strength  of  the  Law 26 

Part  IL 

Social  Equality 28 

Man-Servant — Woman- Servant 29 

Crime,  Murder — Asylum 31 

Penal  Laws — Exemption — Capital  Punishment 32 

Filial  Disrespect — Man  Stealing — Maltreatment 34 

Eye  for  Eye  and  Democracy — Compensation 37 

Old  and  New  Testament  on  that 39 

Eabbinical  Penal  Code 40 

Simon  b.  Shetah  on  that 42 

The  New  Testament  on  that 46 


IV  CONTENTS. 


PAGB. 


Native  and  Alien 47 

Civil  Jurisprudence,  Theft,  Fraud,  Burglary 48 

Status  of  Stranger — One  God,  one  Law 51 

Stranger,  Widow  and  Orphan — Plimsol  in  Parliament 53 

Creed  and  Deed — Hospitality — Protection  and  Bread 54 

Legislator's  Heart — Cardinal  Manning 67 

Usury,  Interest  and  Profit  in  Pentateuch 58 

Stranger  in  Greece — Bible — Homer 59 

Jahveh  and  Zeus 62 

Benjaminite  War 64 

Expressions  for  Foreigner  in  Pentateuch 65 

Talmud  on  Strangers  and  Gentiles — Casuists 66 

Keview,  Bible  Tolerance — Bismarck's  Biases 72 

Part   III. 

Eqiial  Distribution  of  Wealth 80 

Salisbury,  Chamberlain,  Huxley  on  it 81 

Jubilee  and  Septennate 83 

Septennate  and  Indebtedness 87 

State  Polity  and  Bible  Economics 89 

Debtors  in  Rome  and  Judrea,  Cicero  on  it 89 

Present  and  Ancient  Economics 91 

Number  Seven.     Sacred  in  antiquity 92 

Was  Septennate  a  Fact  ?    Evidence 93 

Abolishment  of  Septennate — Never  really  tried 96 

Septennate  and  Modern  Charity ; 98 

Exemption  Laws — Code  Napoleon  on  it 99 

Restime  of  Jubilee  and  Septennate.     Bible,  Talmud,  History. ...  1 01 

Bible  and  Comrminism.  — Matthew  Arnold 104 

Bible  and  Socialism 107 

Program  of  Socialism 108 


CONTENTS.  V 

Karl  Marx's  Doctrines  on  Lalor,  Land,  Property 109 

Criticism  of  Marx's  System 112 

Herbert  Spencer  on  Property 113 

Competition,  honest  and  not — Laissez  aller 114 

Karl  Marx,  continued — Bakunin 130 

Marx's  Optimism. — The  Socialistic  Ideal 131 

His  Denunciations — Democracy,  Inventions 133 

Parallels  and  Contrasts ,  Bille  and  Socialism 135 

Marx,  Son  of  the  Prophets 131 

Socialism  and  Bible  Economics 133 

Septennate,  Strong  and  "Weak  Sides.— Never  tried 135 

SabbatJi  and  the  Social  Question 137 

The  Bible  on  the  Sabbath 138 

Talmud  and  Philosophers  on  it 140 

Numbers  one,  three  and  seven,  in  Greece  and  Judaea 143 

Sahhath  in  History. — Manna. — In  Hoary  Times 144 

Sabbath  the  Grand  Social  Institution 147 

Sabbath's  Bearings— Physical,  Social,  Intellectual 150 

Democracy,  Aristocracy,  Ochlocracy. — Natural,  Artificial 153 

Sabbath  Influence.— Emancipation  Day.— Foot  Man's  Day 158 

Sabbath  Politically. — Kelease  and  Jubilee 163 

Sabbath  and  the  Social  Problem.     American  Democracy 165 

Part  IV. 

State  and  Solidarity.      Solidarity  or  Prejudice 169 

Bible  poor-laws. — Poor  and  Pauper..  173 

Negative  poor-laws. — Usury  and   Monopoly 175 

Marriage,  Divorce  and  Solidarity.- Moses,  Mohammed 177 

Levirates'  Marriage  and  Solidarity 179 

Naomi  and  Kuth— Racial  Intermarriage 180 

Piety  for  the  Dead.— Greece  ;  Rome  and  Solidarity 182 


VI  CONTENTS. 

PAOE. 

The  Sublime  with  Classics  and  Moderns 184 

Piety  in  Homer. — In  Bible 186 

Bible  Eeverence  and  Solidarity 191 

Jules  Simon  on  Reverence 193 

Cave  of  Machpelah  and  Family  Sympathy 194 

Moses'  Two  Arks — Serah  b.  Ashir 196 

Positive  Benevolence  a7id  Poor  Laws — Tithes 199 

Bible  Charity,  Unsectarian 202 

Rabbinical  Charity — New  Testament 203 

Talmudical  Charity  Methods 207 

Herbert  Spencer,  etc. ,  on  Public  A  Imsgiving 209 

Mosaic  Solidarity 212 

Retrospect — State  Charity — Divine  Legislation 214 

Church  and  State  in  the  Bible 217 

Sacrifices  and  Ceremonies — Homer's  Gods 218 

Theological  Crimes — Rabbi's  Exuberance 222 

Kabbalah  to  Moses  Mendelssohn  on  it 226 

Resume  of  the  foregoing 227 

Retrospect,  Cardinal  and  General  Principles — Talmud 229 

Aims  of  the  Bible  Scheme 236 

Conclusion :  the  Bible  and  present  Society 240 

Comments  on  Author's  Works 245 


Spirit  of  the  Biblical  Legislation. 


PART   I. 
-SCOPE   OF   THE   BOOK. 


In  delivering  over  this  volume  to  a  kind  public,  tlie 
author  does  not  presume  to  convey  the  idea  of  offering 
hereby  a  full  tableau  and  a  complete  discussion  of  all  the 
Biblical  institutions,  statutes  and  laws.  Such  is  not  his 
scope;  he  aims  rather  at  elucidating  the  spirit  of  the  law; 
to  examine  not  the  matter  and  the  details,  but  the  prin- 
ciples animating  and  pervading  it ;  to  search  for,  and,  if 
possible,  to  point  out  the  objects  of  the  legislator  in  framing 
the  code.  This  conscientious  examination  the  reader  will 
find  here,  and  by  way  of  illustration,  a  large  part  of  the 
leading  groups  of  the  law,  too,  carefully  analyzed  and  set 
forth. 

For  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century,  having  had  it  as 
my  calling  to  publicly  interpret  the  Bible  and  its  commen- 
taries; fully  well  aware,  with  the  best  expounders,  that 
part  of  its  prescriptions  belong  to  ages  and  circumstances 
in  which  they  were  originated ;  whilst  part  of  them  were 
framed  for  later  centuries,  some  even  for  times  yet  to 
come, — I  tried  to  elucidate  here,  not  so  much  the  matter 
thereof,  as  rather  their  final,  social,  political  and  ethical 
objects  in  view. 

Part  of  the  results  of  these  modest  endeavors  are  laid 
down  in  the  following  pages,  An  purpose  and  intentionally 
denominated :  "Spirit  of  the  Biblical  Legislation." 


2  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

Tlie  reader  will,  therefore,  be  so  kind  as  not  to  look  liere 
for  a  work  as  that  of  Michaeli's  '■'■Laws  of  Moses, ''^  or  Salva- 
dor's '^Institutions  de  Mo'isej'^  or  the  Hebrew  i^'Taamai 
Ha-Mizvot?i^^)  ^'Reasons  for  the  Bible  Commandments^'' 
but  rather  as  Montesquieu's  "Esprit  des  LoisP  As  that 
French  writer  took,  especially,  tlie  Roman  Law  for  his 
starting  point  and,  at  the  hand  thereof,  discussed  many  of 
the  modern  legal  codes,  in  nearly  the  same  manner  did  I 
treat  here  of  the  Biblical  Legislation  in  constant  parallel 
with  modern  laws  and  institutions. 

Particularly  do  these  pages  endeavor  to  find  out  the 
original  Mosaic  aims,  ideas  and  ideals  concerning  the  polit- 
ical and  social  status  of  the  people  to  be  constituted;  the 
State,  the  Church,  the  Society,  and  the  Economic  condi- 
tions that  legislation  was  intended  for. 

Whilst  thus  expressly  stating  that  this  volume  is  not  a 
rendition  of  the  entire  and  full  Biblical  code,  the  reader 
will  find  that,  by  way  of  illustration  and  as  examples  of  the 
theories  brought  forward,  I  have  especially  treated  in  these 
pages  a  salient  portion  of  the  Biblical  code,  viz :  those  most 
important  enactments  bearing  on  State,  society,  civil,  crimi- 
nal and  economic  laws,  family  and  church,  contained  in  the 
chapters  21  to  24  of  Exodus,  conjointly  with  their  wide 
ramifications,  numerous  expoundings  and  qualifications, 
scattered  throughout  the  entire  Pentateuch  aud  the  Bible. 

These  chapters  are  denominated  "  Laios  and  Ordinances'^ 
^'  Judgments ^^^  "  MisJipatim,'"  par  excellence,  in  sacred  writ. 
As  these  appear  to  have  been  the  nucleus  around  which  the 
Biblical  legislation  clustered  and  from  which  it  slowly 
developed,  they  form  the  centre  of  this  volume. 

Around  this  centre  of  laws  and  conjointly  with  them, 
find  here  full  room  and  consideration  their  later  elaborations 
in  the  Talmud,  Halacliah  and  Agadah,  the  New  Testa- 
ment, ofen,  too,  their  parallels  in  Roman  law,  Zend 
Avesta  and  Koran,  and  especially  their  paramount  influ- 
ence upon  the  State,  the  society  and  the  laws  of  to-day. 


SCOPE   OF   THE   BOOK.  3 

The  result  of  these  investigations  seems  to  me  to  be  that 
most  of  the  political  aspirations  of  our  own  contemporaries, 
of  our  truest  statesmen  and  noblest  philanthropists,  that 
most,  if  not  all,  of  the  objects  of  our  present  democracy, 
have  had  their  forerunner,  their  initiator,  their  first  warm 
advocate  in  the  Legislator  of  Sinai;  that  our  American 
democracy  found  its  first  enthusiastic  expression  in  the 
Pentateuch,  repeated  and  inculcated  over  and  over  by  the 
Biblical  prophets;  that  modern  democracy  is  simply  the 
evolution  of  the  Biblical  Democracy. 

As  a  practical  law,  the  great  hook  undoubtedly  made  its 
concessions  to  the  rude  conditions  it  originated  in  and 
emerged  from.  But,  as  is  the  case  with  all  extraordinary  pro- 
ductions of  divine  mind,  the  Biblical  legislation  was  essen- 
tially non-sectarian;  that  it  finally  aimed  at  universal  jus- 
tice, tempered  with  charity,  for  universal  mankind,  chil- 
dren of  the  one  universal  Parent ;  that  though  admitting 
special  forms  for  a  special  people  and  country,  it  taught  but 
universal  doctrines ;  that  Israel  was  but  a  nucleus  of  the 
one  human  race,  and  Canaan  or  Judaea  but  an  epitomized 
United  States  of  the  World. 

Every  one  knows  the  prejudices  the  Bible  has  been, 
and  is  as  yet,  the  object  of.  To  some  it  is  the  incarnate, 
all-absorbing,  crystallized,  last  and  final  word  of  God, 
authoritative  for  all  times  and  all  circumstances.  To  others 
it  is  an  archaeological  mosaic,  a  compound  of  divers  elements 
and  heterogeneous  suggestions,  by  different  schools  and 
centuries,  for  various  objects  in  view.  The  following  pages, 
examining  into  its  leading  principles  and  institutions,  not 
prejudiced  by  any  bias  of  sect,  doctrine  or  theology,  rever- 
ently abstaining  from,  all  inquiry  into  the  supernatural  and 
miraculous,  taking  the  Bible  as  a  positive  legislation  and 
as  extant  before  our  eyes,  studying  it  in  the  light  of  reason 
and  fairness,  in  connection  with  the  contemporaneous  and 
subsequent  history  of  ethical  and  political  human  develop- 


4  SPIRIT    OF  THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

ment,  for  these  last  three  thousand  years,  they  result  in  the 
following  conclusion !  The  Bible  represents  a  well  digested 
and  admirable  whole,  an  elaborate  system  for  an  ever- 
developing,  homogeneous  human  kind,  progressing  under 
struggle,  vice  and  error,  towards  the  ideal  of  "<x  Mngdom  of 
priests  and  a  holy  nation"  a  humanity,  united  by  justice^ 
reason  and  sympathy,  with  the  same  rights  and  duties  and 
aspirations;  "no  longer  learning  war;"  "breaking  their 
swords  into  implements  of  husbandry ; "  following  up  the 
divine  law  of  justice  and  eternal  fitness,  and  establishing 
slowly  "a  kingdom  of  Heaven  on  earth,"  the  dominion  of 
truth,  peace  and  love  among  harmonized  and  reconciled 
mankind. 

This  highest  ideal  concerning  State  and  Society,  aspired 
to  by  present  democracy,  by  modern  humane  economists 
and  philanthropists,  is  identically  the  same  as  the  one  held 
up  in  the  Pentateuch ;  of  course  with  the  necessary  develop- 
ments and  complements  answering  our  contemporaneous 
conditions.  That  type  and  ideal  first  dawned  and  loomed 
up  in  the  Pentateuchal  Institutions.  It  developed  with  the 
Judgean  seers  and  the  non-Judsean  sages.  It  is  taking  definite 
shape  and  form  with  Adam  Smith  and  John  Stuart  Mill, 
with  Karl  Marx  and  Herbert  Spencer.  It  is  being  slowly 
realized  in  our  present  State  and  Society.  It  is  all  along 
but  one  chain  of  evolving,  philanthropic  thought  about 
human  amelioration,  from  Sinai  to  Washington,  from  Abra- 
ham to  Lincoln  and  Cleveland.  That  book  is  therefore  one 
of  the  grandest  monuments  extant  for  the  contemplation 
and  the  study  of  man.  It  is  not  simply  a  book ;  it  is  the 
book;  it  is  the  Bible.  It  is  underlying  human  civilization. 
It  is  not  the  property  of  this  nation  and  that  country,  but 
of  mankind,  of  the  world,  the  study  and  the  profit  of  ages 
yet  to  come. 

In  1888,  at  the  publication  of  my  ^^  Thoughts  on  Religious 
Rites  and  Views, ^^  that  small  volume  was  the  object  of  many 


SCOPE    OF    THE    BOOK.  0 

kind  cominents  and  appreciations  by  some  of  tlie  best  and 
most  learned  men  of  both  bemisplieres ;  as  by  the  hoary, 
English  leader,  the  Right  Hon.  W.  E.  Gladstone;  the  re- 
nowned Professors,  Franz  Delitzsch  and  W.  Wundt,  of  Leip- 
sic;  N.  Bruell,  of  Frankfurt;  H.  Gratz,  of  Breslau;  A.  Neubauer, 
of  Oxford ;  Presidents  Day,  of  Yale,  and  Green,  of  Prince- 
ton Universities  ;  Fredrich  v  Bodenstedt,  the  poet,  etc.,  etc. 
In  different  words  they  kindly  declared  "  the  little  book  to 
contain  much  food  for  reflection,  and  a  real  contribution  to 
science."  (Delitzsch).  Such  kind  encouragement  made  me 
continue  my  modest  efforts,  and  these  leaves  are  part  of  the 
result  thereof. 

Go  ye  forth  then,  as  a  respectful  greeting  to  these  eminent 
men,  my  noble  seniors  and  kind  teachers,  objects  of  my 
veneration  and  my  emulation,  bearers  of  solace  and  cheer 
to  me  in  the  sharp  and  intense  "struggle  for  existence^" 
you  great  and  good  men,  some  of  you  resting  already,  your 
work  nobly  finished,  and  some  yet  leading  on  the  "  Wars  of 
JaJiveJi/'  in  the  service  of  humanity !  May  these  leaves  be 
grateful  to  you,  and  may  they  prove  as  interesting  and  use- 
ful to  the  kind  public  at  large. 

THE  AUTHOR. 

Baltimore,  August,  1893. 


THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 


The  Biblical  statutes  on  State  and  Society,  on  civil,  crim- 
inal and  economic  legislation  have,  no  doubt,  their  root 
and  raison  d'  etre  in  the  hoary  Ten  Commandments.  That 
truly  Sinaitic  Magna  Charta  dates  back  to  the  great  law- 
giver. It  bears  on  its  face  all  the  marks  of  original  legisla- 
tion. All  hypercritical  cavelling  is  impotent  to  impugn 
that  fact.  It  is  the  organic  law  of  the  Biblical  Common- 
wealth. The  Decalogue  establishes  the  State  and  its  people 
on  the  immovable  basis  of  God,  as  omnipotent  Ruler  and 
all-wise  Providence;  on  a  sanctified  humanity, — the  Sab- 
bath or  day  of  culture;  on  the  family,  with  filial  piety  J 
on  the  sacredness  of  life,  property  and  chastity;  on  the 
inviolability  of  our  word  and  the  purity  of  our  feelings. 
On  such  a  basis  the  Biblical  Society  could  rise  to  the  ideal 
of  a  "kingdom  of  priests  and  holy  nation" — a  "kingdom  of 
Heaven  upon  earth  " — a  society  of  educated,  free  and  duty- 
bound  men  and  women. 

Sinai. 

From  that  Sinaic  root  slowly  grew  up  the  tree  and  devel- 
oped the  branches  and  the  fruit  of  the  Mosaic  Legislation, 
as  extant  in  "Laws  and  Ordinances,"  ''Mishpatim^''^  in  II. 
M.  21,  etc. ;  successively  supplemented  and  enlarged  in 
Pentateuch  and  Bible,  elaborated  in  Talmud,  slowly  rising 
to  a  fairly  complete  legislation,  civil  and  criminal,  agrarian 
and  religious;  political,  social  and  ecclesiastical.  With 
rare  exceptions,  they  are  nearly  all  worked  out  in  the  same 
spirit,  all  bear  the  stamp  of  the  same  divine  genius,  as  the 
splendid  rays,  the  bright  emanations  from  the  same  flaming 


SINAI.  / 

Horeb,   tlie   wisdom   and   the   benevolence  of   the  "  great 
Moses,  standing  upon  Sinai  as  his  footstool."  C) 

The  Cardinal  Principles. 

Four  cardinal  principles  appear  to  underlie  that  entire 
code.  These  four  principles  are  but  in  our  present  century 
fully  being  appreciated  and  slowly  realized.  They  have 
first  clearly  loomed  up  before  the  Biblical  Lawgiver,  more 
than  3,000  years  ago !  These  are :  Individual  liberty. 
Social  equality,  Equal  distribution  of  the  national  wealth, 
and  Community  of  interests,  or  Solidarity.  Let  us  illustrate 
these  four  principles : 

I.  Individual  Liberty. — In  ancient,  and  even  in  modern, 
times  the  State  consisted  of  dominant  races  and  of  subju- 
gated ones.  The  latter  were  not  free,  and  the  first  neither. 
Only  the  State  was  free,  its  leaders,  tlie  prince,  the  Senate, 
the  nobles,  the  high  ecclesiastics,  etc.  Whilst  the  bulk  of 
the  people,  the  rank  and  file  of  even  the  dominant  race, 
had  no  personal  freedom.  The  individual,  Ms  life,  his 
family,  his  property,  his  work,  all  belonged  to  the  State. 
His  rights  were  measured  by  the  good  pleasure  of  the 
rulers. 

The  Bible  first  put  forth  the  axiom:  Every  Ebrew 
inhabitant  of  the  country  is  personally  free;  the  man, 
woman  and  child;  the  poor,  the  weak,  the  criminal,  cannot 
lose  their  original  character  of  free  agents.  All  yield  to 
the  State  just  what  is  necessary  for  their  own  protection. 
None  are  born  to  rule,  none  to  serve.  God  and  law  are 
alone  natural  rulers.  Even  laws  had  to  be  accepted  by  the 
people,  in  covenant  with  God. 

The  later  kings  were  elected  and  had  a  Constitution. 
Thus  the  claim  that  personal  liberty  came  into  the  world 
with  free  Greece,  or  Patrician  Rome,  or  the  Anglo-Saxons? 
or  with   the   English    Charta   Magna,  or  with  Calvin   of 

(1)  Heine. 


8  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION, 

Geneva,  or  with  Holland  and  Switzerland,  or  witli  Rousseau 
and  Voltaire,  or  the  American  and  French  revolutions, — 
that  claim  is  unfounded.  Personal  freedom  dawned  upon 
history  with  the  Code  as  extant  in  II.  Moses,  21,  called 
'^Mishpatim,"  over  3,000  years  ago.  That  blessed  seed  of 
the  principle  of  human  freedom  may  be  as  old  as  the 
Adamite  or  Biblical  era  of  civilization.  It  was  propagated 
by  Abraham  with  the  doctrine  of  Monotheism  as  the  creed 
of  the  people:  Whereas  the  Egyptian  jMysteries  may  have 
taught  both  as  the  privilege  of  the  few.  The  idea  of 
human  freedom  thus  entered  with  the  patriarchs  Jacob  and 
Joseph  into  the  splendid  and  powerful,  yet  despotically- 
governed  Egypt;  and  crushed  by  the  Pharaohs,  the  Raamses 
and  Menephtas  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty,  freedom  went 
forth  triumphant,  with  ]\Ioses,  to  assert  itself  in  eternal 
legislation  slowly  embracing  mankind. 

II.  Social  Equality. — The  aijcient  society  was  a  hierarchy 
of  different  gradations  and  strata ;  a  monarch,  descendant 
from  and  representative  of  the  gods ;  a  nobility  by  the  same 
claim,  his  companions  and  satellites;  a  military  clan,  his 
supporters  and  tools;  an  ecclesiastical  aristocracy,  his  coad- 
jutors ;  the  trades  and  crafts,  and  lastly  the  serfs,  remnants 
of  all  the  vanquished  tribes.  Hence,  were  the  inhabitants 
divided  up  into  privileged  classes  and  disfranchised  ones — 
in  born  ruling,  and  in  born  serving  social  strata.  The  Bible 
conceived  another  polity ;  a  commonwealth  without  a  hier- 
archy, a  State  without  king,  nobility  or  military  class,  with 
absolutely  equal  civic  rights  and  duties,  burdens  and  emolu- 
ments for  all.  This  social  equality  was  the  necessary  result 
of  the  personal  liberty  underlying  the  Biblical  republic  in 
federation.  Later,  monarchy  and  aristocracy  crept  in,  yet 
democracy  remained  paramount.  Its  sense  of  equality  has 
remained  to  this  day  as  a  salient  feature  of  the  Hebrew 
people. 


THE   CARDINAL   PRINCIPLES.  9 

III.  Equal  distribution  of  the  national  loealth  among 
the  menibers  of  the  Ebrew  nationality.  This  is  the 
next  concomitant  of  the  axiom  of  individual  liberty. 
The  inequality  of  wealth  is  the  supreme  cause  of  the 
deterioration  of  civil  freedom  and  equality.  The  ex- 
orbitantly and  hereditarily  wealthy  will  soon  buy  off 
those  rights  from  the  chronically  poor  and  weak  ones. 
You  remember  the  constant  commotions  among  these 
classes  in  Athens  and  Rome.  You  remember  how  Draco 
and  Lycurgus  tried  to  avoid  these  difficulties  by  even 
more  dangerous  social  monstrosities.  The  Mosaic  lawgiver 
succeeded  better  in  that  attempt  at  economical  average 
equality,  by  infinitely  more  moral  and  more  humane  means. 
He  divided  his  country's  soil,  per  capita,  in  equal  portions, 
into  family  lots,  and  declared  them  inalienable,  just  as  the  cit- 
izen's personal  liberty.  Commerce  and  enriching  wars  were 
discountenanced.  A  new  economic  feature  of  the  grandest 
dimensions,  periodically  renovating  the  social  physiognomy 
and  restoring  the  equality  of  property,  was  introduced  into 
the  State,  forever  prohibiting  plutocracy,  proletariat  and 
pauperism  ;  same  justice  to  all ;  privilege  and  drawback  to 
none;  hence  all  had  the  same  chances  in  the  arena  of 
existence. 

IV.  Solidarity  or  Community  of  Interests. — The  Biblical 
legislator  endeavors  by  positive  laws,  religious  doctrines 
and  moral  persuasions,  to  impress  his  fellow-citizens  with  a 
sense  of  mutual  interest  in  each  other,  the  deep  conscious- 
ness of  altruism,  side  by  side  with  the  other  necessary 
instinct  of  egoism.  "  Live  and  let  live."  "  Love  thy  neigh- 
bor as  thyself."  Thine  interest  is  not  antagonistic  to  his. 
It  is  rather  intimately  bound  up  with  his  and  that  of  the 
entire  community. 


10  spirit  of  the  biblical  legislation. 

Herbert  Spencer's  Criticism. 

When  Herbert  Spencer  points  out^^^  tlie  flaerrant  contra- 
diction of  the  two  dominant  religions,  viz :  Selfishness  and 
Self-sacrifice,  the  first  in  practice,  the  latter  in  theory,  the 
one  in  the  State,  the  other  in  the  Church,  this  may  be  true 
with  the  State  and  the  Church,  now,  as  extant.  The  present 
society  practices  egoism;  the  Church  teaches  "Love  thy 
neighbor — yea,  love  thy  enemy — as  thyself."  We  must  not 
forget  that  the  present  State  and  the  present  Church  derive 
from  divers  sources:  the  State  from  Diocletian  and  Con- 
stantine  the  Great,  the  Church  from  Jesus  and  Paul — vastly 
different  characters !  The  first  two  acting  from  selfishness, 
the  others  from  self-sacrifice,  and  hence  the  flagrant  dis- 
crepancy, so  pointedly  and  vividly  remarked  by  Herbert 
Spencer,  J.  J.  Rousseau  and  others.  Not  so  in  the  Biblical 
polity.  There  stand  State  and  Church  upon  the  harmonious 
co-workings  of  egoism  and  altruism  combined.  Self-preser- 
vation requires  the  preservation  of  our  fellows.  Our 
interests  go  hand  in  hand  with  those  of  our  neighbors. 
The  aim  is :  ^'-  LooTc  that  there  should  be  no  chronic  pauper 
class  among  you."  (V.  M.  15,  4.)  There  will  always  be, 
sporadically,  poor  ones.  Let  them  not  become  permanent, 
hereditary,  socially  doomed  proletarians. 

Hence  is  charity  with  the  Pentateuch,  not  an  ideal,  a 
sermon,  but  a  commandment,  a  positive  duty.  Help  the 
poor  so  as  never  more  to  need  thy  help.  Lend  him  even  on 
a  slender  security.  So  in  Pentateuch,  Talmud  and  Casuists 
(Joreh  Deah,  246,  9.)  Take  no  interest  nor  increase  of  him. 
He  must  pay  his  debts,  even  by  six  years  labor,  but  the 
seventh  year  cancels  them.  He  cannot  be  sold  nor  im- 
prisoned for  such.  In  Athens  and  Rome  he  could, — even  be 
mutilated,  too.  There  his  family  also  could  be  taken  from 
him.  The  Pentateuch  levies  a  host  of  imposts  upon  the 
farmer  in  favor  of  the  poor,  the  stranger,  the  widow  and  the 

(I)  Data  of  Ethics. 


FREEDOM    A    BIBLICAL    DOCTRINE.  11 

orphan,  the  State  and  the  temple ;   not  as  alms,  but  as  a 
stern  duty  of  solidarity. 

Man's  Personal  Freedom. 

Having  glanced  at  the  four  cardinal  principles  of  the 
Biblical  legislation,  let  us  analyze  some  passages  of  that 
code,  following  the  chapters  and  verses  designated  as  Laws 
and  Ordinances  in  II.  M.  21,  etc.,  called  ^^  Mishpatim"  in 
the  text. 

The  universal  feature  of  the  ancient  State  and  Society 
being  serfdom,  the  woman,  the  child,  the  poor,  the  conquered, 
the  foreigner,  as  also  the  mass  of  the  people  being  unfree, 
the  lawgiver  begins  with  the  declaration  of  the  personal 
freedom  of  each  and  every  citizen  (II.  M.  21,2.) 

"  When  thou  wilt  buy  an  Ebrew  servant  (slave  or  working 
man)  for  six  years  he  shall  serve,  and  in  the  seventh  he 
shall  go  free  without  redemption  money."  That  verse 
means  plainly  that  an  Ebrew  can  never  be  a  slave.  He  can 
be  hired  out  for  some  years,  but  his  liberty  is  inalienable. 

Indeed,  from  II.  M.  22,2,  the  Talmud  gathers  that  the 
above  took  place  forcibly,  that  the  Ebrew  was  sold  by  the 
courts  for  theft,  and  nevertheless  the  quality  of  a  freeman 
could  not  be  wrested  from  him,  as  a  criminal  either.  Hence 
is  personal  liberty  inherent.  To  be  an  Ebrew  is  to  be  free. 
The  principle  was,  "To  me  are  the  children  of  Israel  servants 
(III.  M.,  25,55)*  God's  servants ;  man's  never." 

freedom  a  biblical  doctrine. 

Remembering  this  to  have  been  enacted  over  three  thou- 
sand years  ago, — those  chapters  in  form  and  substance  point- 
ing to  a  primitive  condition  of  ancient  Israel, — that  is  truly 
grand !  It  points  to  the  fact  that  the  personal  freedom  idea 
did  not  come  with  the  Saxons  or  the  Huguenots,  or  classical 
Greece,  or  the  American  and  French  Revolutions,  but  that 
mankind  owes  it  to  the  Bible. 


12  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

(II.  M.  21,3.)  "  If  the  Ehrew  servant  he  a  husland,  Ms 
wife  leaves  with  him.^^  During  his  servitude  the  master 
was  bound  to  support  her,  justly  remarked  the  Rabbis. — 
(Ibid.,  verse  4.)  "  But  if  the  master  gave  him  a  (slave)  wife, 
she  and  her  children  remain  with  the  master."  Here  we 
find  the  clashing,  hard  concessions  to  the  social  conditions, 
stronger  than  the  laws  of  nature  and  State. — (Ibid.,  verses 
5  and  6.)  "  But  if  the  servant  declare  to  prefer  Ms  affec- 
tion for  Ms  Tnaster  and  family  to  his  freedom,  then  let 
the  rogue  be  branded  as  a  slave."  ^^  His  master  shall 
bring  Mm  to  the  Courts  and  nail  his  ear  to  the  public  gate, 
and  then  he  shall  serve  for  ever."  "  Why  bore  the  ear?" 
says  a  witty  expounder.  The  ear  that  heard,  but  did  not 
listen  to,  at  Sinai,  "  thou  shall  not  steal,''^  not  be  lazy,  not  be 
wasteful,  etc.,  shall  be  bored  for  having  neglected  the 
lesson.  Historically,  the  boring  of  the  ear  was  the  mark  of 
slavery  among  ancient  nations.  Our  ladies'  ear-rings  are 
yet  a  sparkling  reminiscence  thereof.  The  clause,  ^^  He 
shall  serve  for  ever,^^  received  later  by  the  Rabbis  the 
interpretation  of :  He  shall  serve  till  the  coming  jubilee , 
or  until  his  master's  death ;  thus  forcing  the  letter  of  Holy 
Writ  in  favor  of  the  spirit  thereof;  the  biblical  law  is 
thus  consecrating  the  inviolability  principle,  good  for  every 
Ebrew  inhabitant,  that  personal  liberty  is  inalienable,  even 
with  the  criminal  and  the  coward,  not  admitting  even  the 
possibility  of  absolute  loss  of  freedom.  Let  us  not  overlook 
the  moral  and  psychological  features  of  that  passage :  A 
vicious  freemen  is  given  to  theft ;  he  lapses  unto  serfdom ; 
he  marries  a  slave;  he  begets  slave  children;  he  has  to 
choose  between  these  and  his  free  citizenship  ;  and  yielding 
to  his  natural  yearnings,  he  must  bear  the  mark  of  infamy. 
"  One  sin  brings  another  one"  and  "  Misfortune  never  comes 
alone." 


status  of  womax  ix  the  bible.  13 

Status  of  Woman  in  the  Bible. 

With  even  greater  care  does  tlie  lawgiver  screen  the 
freedom,  the  dignity,  the  delicacy  of  woman.  Woman,  the 
'■^mother  of  all  living"  is  the  rudiment  of  society.  Not  an 
horn"  could  she  alienate  her  freedom.  A  free  person,  wife 
and  mother,  her  children,  too,  were  free.  Hence  was  so  the 
entire  people.  You  remember  the  myth  of  Pandora,  the 
toy,  drudge,  and  the  Circe  of  the  Greek  world.  The  Ehrew 
Bve  represents  woman  as  the  very  opposite  thereof.  She  is 
the  wife,  help-meet  and  blessing  of  man.  Hence  the  noble 
legislation  concerning  her  station  in  II.  M.  21,  7  to  12.  She 
could  not  be  enslaved  for  one  single  moment.  From  her 
father  or  brother  she  had  to  pass  to  none  else  but  her 
husband.  It  was,  therefore,  a  natural  presumption  that  her 
master  would  make  her  his  wife.  If  he  did  not,  she  was 
considered  as  ill-used ;  something  not  far  from  the  modern 
breach  of  promise.  Her  lord  was  morally  bound  to  marry 
her,  he  or  his  son  in  his  stead.  If  not,  he  has  lost  his 
money,  and  she  shall  leave  him.  A  Ebrew  woman  shall 
be  a  wife  and  a  mother,  never  a  slave !  Israel  shall  be  a 
nation  of  free  men  and  free  women.  Thus  the  law  states, 
"  Wheii  she  displeased  her  master  to  lohom  she  was 
destined,  he  shall  free  her."  Or  give  her  to  his  son,  and 
then  she  must  be  treated  as  an  honorable  girl.  The  natural 
presumption  being  that  her  master  was  acquiring  her  to 
make  her  his  legitimate  wife,  he  was  fairly  expected  to 
fulfill  her  expectations.  Yet  he  could  not  be  compelled  to 
do  so.  The  legislator  supposed  that  she  had  displeased 
him.  Some  other  reasons,  less  charitable,  he  would  not 
accept.  If  this  poor  girl  did  not  appear  to  the  master  to  be 
good  enough  for  his  wife,  he  could  not  alienate,  speculate 
nor  trifle  with  her,  the  modern  part  of  Gretchen  or  Clarcheii 
being  unknown  to  Mosaism. 


14  SPIRIT    (JF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATIOX. 

What,  then,  was  the  reparation,  the  honorable  amends 
due  to  her?  His  son  was  to  marry  her,  or  he  had  to  free 
and  endow  her;  assist  her  to  a  new  establishment.  The 
master  not  consenting  to  be  her  spouse,  could  not  be  her  lord 
either ;  and  she  could  not  stay  under  his  roof  with  her 
modesty  unprotected.  What  noble  championship  of  woman's 
rights!  As  in  those  barbarous  times,  one  loop-hole  was 
open  yet  to  avarice  and  lust,  as  the  master  might  contrive 
to  pass  her  away  to  somebody  else,  in  order  to  get  rid  of 
her  shrieks  and  her  claims,  the  legislator  stopped  up  that 
loop-hole.  In  just  indignation  he  exclaims :  "  He  is  not 
allowed  to  sell  her  to  a  stranger.  He  having  been  faithless 
to  her,  she  shall  leave  him ;  she  is  free !  " 

By  one  of  the  Hermeneutic  rules  that  Hillel  I,  and 
especially  later,  R.  Ismael  and  R.  Jose,  the  Galilean,  had 
contrived  in  order  to  enact  new  laws  opportune  for  the 
times,  tradition  curtailed  that  parental  right  to  sell  one's 
own  daughter,  viz.,  limiting  it  to  her  puberty.  If  at  that 
time,  about  twelve  and  a-half  years  old,  she  had  not  been 
betrothed  to  her  master,  she  could  leave  him  and  dispose 
of  herself  at  full  liberty.  So,  too,  was  she  free,  even  within 
the  six  years'  servitude,  if  her  master  died.  In  Hindostan, 
and  even  elsewhere,  she  had  to  ascend  with  him  to  the 
funeral  pile  and  serve  him— in  Hades. 

Eve  and  Pandora. 

Yet  you  will  hear  time  and  again  the  claim  that  the  Bible 
has  created  the  prejudice  of  the  inferiority  of  woman,  and 
this  in  the  known  legend  of  the  temptation  of  the  first  couple 
by  the  serpent  (I.  M.  3).  The  vulgar  is  misrepresenting  the 
sense  of  that  Oriental  allegory  and  overlooking  the  real  views 
of  the  sacred  writer,  plainly  expressed  in  the  history  of  the 
creation  of  woman.  There  she  is  declared  and  emphasized 
upon,  as  the  noble  companion  of  man — in  contradistinction 
with  the  Greek  Pandora,  created  for  the   destruction  of 


CHRISTIANITY    AXD    AVOMAN.  15 

man.  Indeed,  womankind  always  was  aware  of  the  liio:li 
plane  the  Bible  placed  them  upon ;  they  willingly  exchanged 
the  position  of  Pandora  for  that  of  E'Kie  ;  that  of  a  drudge, 
or  a  paramour,  or  a  toy,  for  that  of  a  free  and  equal  help- 
meet of  man.  The  sex  always  felt  a  strong  leaning  towards 
the  Ebrew  Bible,  as  the  earliest  advocate  of  their  human 
rights.  The  Greek  poets  imagined  woman  a  bewitching 
she-devil ;  even  Klytemnestra,  Penelopeia  and  Phaedra  are 
not  shown  to  much  advantage.  The  Komans  relegated  her 
into  the  Atrium,  as  the  drudge  or  the  nurse  of  the  children. 
The  Spartans  imagined  her  the  fit  prize  for  the  strongest 
warrior.  The  Teuton  gambled  her  away,  in  lieu  of  some- 
thing else.  The  Slav  made  her  the  beast  of  burden  of  the 
household. 

The  Biblical  Moralist  alone  thought  her  the  free,  equal 
and  dutiful  companion  of  man ;  and  before  him  the  legis- 
lator had  declared  that  no  circumstances,  however  humble, 
can  rob  her  of  the  position  of  an  honorable  citizen,  at  the 
level  of  king  and  high  priest. 

Christianity  and  Woman. 

Hence  Josephus  narrates,  that  1800  years  ago  the  best 
women  of  the  proudest  capitals  of  his  time  felt  much 
inclined  to  Judaism ;  because  they  justly  appreciated  the 
position  which  the  Bible  had  given  them,  and  this  was  the 
good  chance  of  Christianity.  Christianity  was  the  necessary 
outcome  of  the  moral  and  religious  conditions  of  the,  then, 
Gentile  world.  The  faith  in  the  gods  and  their  government 
was  broken  down,  and  the  world  turned  to  Judaism,  its 
God — idea,  morals,  family,  justice  and  purity.  But  the 
Gentiles  were  not  ready  for  the  Judaic  ceremonies  and 
observances.  The  then  Talmudical  Jews  could  not  and 
dared  not  separate  the  two  to  accommodate  the  world. 
They  had  not  the  courage  to  give  the  Gentiles  the  first 
alone  and  drop  the  latter,  and  what  they  did  not  dare,  Paul 


16  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

did.  And  thus  came  out  Christianity;  it  sprung  from  seeds 
left  unharvested.  Christianity  gathered  in  what  the  Bible 
and  the  times  had  matured.  It  arose  from  the  leading  ele- 
ments of  the  Biblical  structure,  with  a  strong  Grseco-Egyp- 
tian  drapery.  It  is  simply  an  abridged  form  of  Judaism, 
adapted  to  the  state  of  mind  of  the  then  Gentile  world. 
Now  the  position  of  woman,  not  as  a  toy  or  a  drudge,  but 
as  the  companion  of  man  in  his  struggle  for  existence,  shar- 
ing in  his  burdens  and  his  triumphs, — that  position  the  Bible 
gave  to  woman.  Woman  seized  upon  the  opportunity, 
gaining  through  that  book  the  throne  in  the  household, 
and  in  her  turn  helped  the  book  to  conquer  the  world. 
Rome  feeling  her  sword  failing,  enlisted  both  book  and 
woman,  and  saved  her  dominion  for  a  new  lease  of  centuries. 
Slowly  mankind  enlisted  Bible,  woman  and  Rome,  and 
gained  by  that  its  own  emancipation,  for  right  engenders 
right,  and  freedom,  freedom.     Wrong  has  no  future. 

Civil  Freedom  Laws. 

Let  us  now  recapitulate  the  leading  traits  of  the  Mosaic 
civil  freedom  laws,  sketched  more  than  3,000  years  ago. 
They  solemnly  guarantee  the  liberty  of  each  and  every 
inhabitant  of  the  land.  The  citizen's  liberty  is  an  inherent 
right,  and  hence  inalienable.  The  criminal  or  the  insolvent 
man  may,  in  punishment,  be  sold,  for  six  years'  labor,  but 
not  beyond  that  term,  guaranteeing  him  all  the  rights  of  a 
free  man,  especially  protection  against  over-hard  work  or 
harsh  treatment,  or  abuse  of  his  helpless  family.  That  law 
declares  woman  to  belong  to  her  family ;  never  to  a  master. 
It  tolerates  no  illegitimate  sexual  connections.  That  is  the 
sense  of  the  Talmudical  axiom — a  striking  instance  of  a 
noble  and  rigid  moral  sense.  (^)  "Any  sexual  union  is  natur- 
ally presumed  to  be  on  legitimate  grounds.'*  It  screens  the 
woman  from  the  ill-usage  of  the  libertine,  the  wealthy  or 

•nxT  n^j^ya  in^^yD  ,n^')v  onx  px  np\n   (i) 


CIVIL    FREEDOM    LAWS.  17 

tJie  rough.  Whoever  thinks  her  too  bad  for  his  wife,  is  too 
mean  to  be  her  lord.  The  Bible  declared  woman  the  equal 
companion  of  man.  (Genesis,  1:26).  It  yielded  to  the 
times  in  making  her  subordinate  to  him,  but  on  express 
condition  that  their  relations  are  those  of  love,  not  of  lord- 
ship ;  those  of  husband  and  wife,  not  master  and  slave. 
That  law,  too,  protects  her  children  against  the  avarice  of 
an  unnatural  or  even  an  unjust  father.  Ever  presuming  and 
treating  mother  and  children  as  legitimate,  both  to  enjoy 
their  full  rights  as  wife  and  heirs ;  not  to  be  alienated,  or 
sold,  or  sent  to  a  foundling  house.  Compare  those  laws 
with  other  legislations,  yea,  even  with  some  of  modern 
times,  where  to  marry  an  ignoble  person  was  considered  a 
crime,  whilst  at  the  same  time  public  justice  was  indiffer- 
ent to  all  irregular,  domestic  intercourse,  deaf  and  blind  to 
the  shrieks  and  tears  of  helpless  women  and  children — 
make  this  comparison,  and  you  will  find  out,  why  many  old 
statute-books  are  buried  in  the  dust  of  oblivion;  why 
others  again  have  been  wiped  out  in  a  pool  of  blood  and 
fire.  Read  of  the  long  and  bloody  wars  of  Rome  and  Byzan- 
tium grappling  with  the  Teutonic  invaders,  under  the 
most  violent  commotions  of  social  conflagrations,  whilst  the 
Mosaic  law  of  3500  years  ago  is  yet  alive,  is  continually 
spreading  to  all  races  and  climes,  is  preserved  and  revered 
as  the  embodiment  of  divine  wisdom.  Because  it  is  not  the 
law  for  the  strong,  the  crafty,  the  highborn,  the  rich,  the 
learned;  it  is  not  the  law  of  the  classes,  but  of  the  masses  ; 
not  the  privilege  of  this  or  that  race  or  people  or  clime,  but 
the  natural  equity,  the  rule  of  conduct  for  all  races,  nations 
and  times.  It  is  the  nearest  expression  of  the  inherent  fit- 
ness of  things,  and  hence  bearing  on  its  face  the  divine  seal 
of  eternal  truth.     This  is  scientific  revelation. 


18  spirit  of  the  biblical  legislation. 

The  Biblical  State  and  Citizenship. 

The  personal  liberty  Mosaism  guarantees  to  its  citizens, 
the  human  dignity  it  vindicates  to  each  and  every  inhabit- 
ant, modified  entirely  and  radically  its  conception  of  the 
State  in  relation  to  the  individual.  Through  all  antiquity 
and  until  recent  times,  the  State  was  all,  the  individual  but 
the  cipher;  the  first  the  unit,  the  latter  the  zero;  the  first 
counted  for  a  thousand,  a  million,  etc.,  according  to  the 
number  of  its  inhabitants,  the  latter  reckoned  for  little  or 
nothing.  The  State  was  the  aim,  the  inhabitants  the  means ; 
the  first  was  the  real  sovereign,  the  other  the  subject;  the 
commonwealth  owned  the  soil,  the  laborer  had  the  drudg- 
ery; the  government  or  prince  was  lawmaker,  and  yet 
above  the  law;  the  subject  had  blindly  to  obey;  his  life, 
his  work,  his  opinion,  his  property,  his  family  belonged  to 
his  country  and  its  chiefs.  The  legislator  aimed  at  the 
security,  the  greatness,  the  welfare  thereof;  whilst  the 
inhabitants  were  rarely  taken  into  consideration. 

The  American  and  the  French  Revolutions,  only  one  cen- 
tury ago,  had  yet  to  struggle  against  such  an  all-absorbing 
State  and  Prince.  The  American  Colonies  were  simply 
sacrificed  to  the  interests  of  Old  England.  They  existed 
in  order  to  buy  English  manufactures,  and  to  produce  for 
the  English  markets.  They  existed  as  the  flock — for  the 
good  of  the  shepherds.  When  the  French  Premier,  Xecker, 
in  1789,  convoked  the  Nobles,  the  Clergy  and  the  Tiers-Etats 
(the  people)  to  remedy  France's  impending  bankruptcy, 
the  liberal  leaders  felt  that  they  had  to  contend  against 
that  State — Moloch.  A  pamphlet  appeared  then  which 
gave  the  clue  to  the  awful  situation,  in  its  very  first  lines. 
^^  QiC esi-ce  qu'  estle  Tiers-Etats?^'  (What  is- the  people). 
''Rien!"  (Nothing).  '' Que-veut-il  ctre?  Tout!''  (What 
will  it  be  ?  All).  This  was  Caesar's  march  over  tlie  Eubicon. 
It  plainly  stated  the  bitter  conflict  between  the  old  and 


THE    STATE    ELSEWHERE.  19 

the  new  society.  When,  a  little  earlier,  in  1661,  Louis  XIV 
of  France  entered  parliament,  whip  in  hand,  and  ordered 
the  venerable  assembly  to  register  his  edicts,  he  frowned 
down  their  hesitations  by  his  superb  '■'■UEtat  c'est  moi'^ 
"The  State  am  I!"  The  people  individually  are  nothing, 
the  State  is  all,  and  is  incarnated  in  the  prince.  Such  it 
was  everywhere  and  through  all  times,  until  the  dawn  of 
this  very  century,  except  in  the  Biblical  Society. 

The  State  Elsewhere. 

The  boastful,  free  Greek  Repiiblics  of  old  were  not  a 
whit  above  that  crude  relation  between  State  and  citizen. 
Remember  the  ruinous  intrigues  between  Athens,  Sparta 
and  Thebes.  Think  of  those  of  Rome  and  its  provinces; 
how  and  by  what  means  she  subjugated  Italy  and  the 
world.  Ponder  over  the  policy  of  the  Roman  and  the  Byzan- 
tine emperors.  Ever  and  ever  there  is  the  question  of  the 
welfare  and  the  glory  of  the  State,  that  means  the  vanity 
of  the  rulers.  Never  is  there  the  question  of  the  masses. 
From '  Charlemagne  to  Louis  XIV,  from  the  Napoleons  to 
the  present  ruling  dynasties,  the  same  reckless  policy  pre- 
vailed. When  Madame  de  Stael  asked  Napoleon  I,  "  Which 
is  the  greatest  woman?" — "  She  who  rears  the  most  soldiers 
for  the  army,"  was  his  ominous  reply.  "  What  are  the 
people  for?"  the  same  was  asked,  and  he  replied  as  cate- 
gorically, "To  pay  taxes  and  be  food  for  the  cannon." 
Machiavelli,  in  his  famous  book  "The  Prince,"  put  it  into 
doctrine  :  "  Everything  is  good  that  increases  the  power  of 
the  Prince ;  the  Prince  is  the  State." 

So  it  was  from  the  dawn  of  history  until  our  own 
times,  except  in  Mosaism,  except  in  the  Biblical  Society. 
Three  thousand  years  ago,  in  Jud£ea,  the  inhabitant  was 
declared  a  citizen,  not  a  subject;  endowed  with  freedom 
and  rights,  which  no  misfortune  could  wrest  from  him,  not 
even  crime ;  there  he  was  the  aim  of  all  legislation ;  he  was 


20  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

there  the  sovereign  and  absolute  owner,  obeying  but  God 
and  law,  whom  every  one  was  bound  to  obey,  the  State  and 
the  governors,  too ;  none  were  born  to  rule,  none  to  obey ; 
his  human  dignity,  his  liberty  were  inalienable.  The  State 
and  the  princes  had  what  he,  what  the  democratic  law,  chose 
to  yield  to  them ;  they  were  for  his  welfare,  not  he  for 
theirs.  The  tithes  were  moral,  free  gifts,  not  taxation  in 
our  sense.  His  conscience,  his  work,  property,  family,  life 
were  his ;  no  privileges  and  no  drawbacks ;  no  aristocracy 
and  no  pariahs ;  the  rulers  were  elected,  and  obeyed  as  long 
as  they  fulfilled  their  duty.  The  right  of  demonstration 
and  rebellion  against  tyranny  was  reserved  and  often  exer- 
cised. Thus,  the  modern  democratic  free  State,  as  aspired 
at  and  slowly  unfolding  in  America  and  Western  Europe, 
was  first  attempted  in  the  Biblical  Society  of  yore. 

The  Biblical  Democracy. 

There  were  there  later  a  king,  an  aristocracy,  a  priesthood, 
with  the  same  pretensions  as  their  later  confreres  elsewhere, 
but  their  roots  were  slender ;  democracy  could  not  be  over- 
turned by  them.  The  priests  had  the  privilege  of  serving 
in  the  national  sanctuary,  but  their  emoluments  were  small ; 
they  had  but  the  voluntary  sacrifices  of  the  people,  {"  God 
is  their  inheritance,"  id  est.,  the  sanctuary  and  its  offerings. 
T.  M.,  10,  8.)  As  the  poets  in  Schiller's  "Division  of  the 
Earth,"  they  had  but  the  spiritual  domain  and  could  never 
become  dangerous;  whilst  the  ancient  Ilagi  were  really 
the  political  masters ;  the  Druidic  priests  possessed  most  of 
the  soil;  the  Catholic  and  Greek  clergy  owned  one-third 
part  of  their  respective  countries  until  of  late.  The  Popes 
claimed  the  sovereignty  of  the  globe ;  the  Hebrew  priest- 
hood remained  poor ;  they  and  the  Rabbis  later  constituted 
but  a  spiritual  aristocracy.  The  nobility  of  mind  will 
never  be  abolished,  because  it  is  the  reward  of  personal 
merit,  and  for  the  good  of  the  people,  and  can  never  become 
dangerous. 


DEMOCRACY,    PROPHETS   AND   TRIBUNES.  21 

There  was,  too,  in  Judaea  a  king  with  a  retinue  of  satellites 
and  nobles,  "but  their  tenure  of  office  was  precarious ;  they 
rooted  in  an  essentially  democratic  soil ;  they  were  appar- 
ently a  later  concession  to  the  new  political  constellations 
and  emergencies.  Compare  I.  Samuel,  Chapter  8;  analyze 
the  circumstances,  the  popular  murmurings,  the  hesitations, 
the  picture  of  priestly  corruption  and  of  bold  royalty  there. 
Compare  that  with  V.  M.,  17,  15,  etc.,  and  you  will  see  how 
democracy  fastened  its  constitutional  fetters  around  the 
new  monarch.  He  shall  not  be  a  foreign  dynast,  no  blue 
blood,  no  descendant  from  the  gods,  but  an  humble  mortal, 
a  'brother  among  his  brethren;  no  assumed  superiority,  no 
exorbitant  wealth  is  allowed ;  no  harem  and  no  standing 
army.  He  shall  study  the  Law  all  his  lifetime  and  not 
depart  from  it,  but  fear  God  and  rule  according  to  that  law. 
Then  he  will  keep  his  office.  If  not,  the  natural  right  of 
rebellion  was  reserved,  and  later  but  too  often  exercised. 
This  is  quite  another  prince  than  that  of  Egypt,  Assyria  or 
Babylonia,  themselves  gods  and  descendants  of  gods.  In 
Judaea  God  alone  continued  king.  A  mortal  king  was  and 
remained  half  a  rebel.  When  the  Ebrew  people  asked 
a  king  of  Samuel,  God  appeased  him  with  the  words  :  "  It  is 
not  thee,  but  Me,  they  have  rejected  from  ruling  over  them." 
(I.  Samuel,  8,  7.)  Saul  was  deposed  by  the  prophet ;  so  was 
Rehoboam  by  popular  secession ;  so  were  many  other 
princes,  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel  especially.  You  see  in 
spite  of  royalty  and  priesthood,  the  Mosaic  democracy 
remained  unbroken. 

Democracy,  Prophets  and  Tribunes. 

Nowhere  is  the  spirit  of  democracy  so  conspicuous  as  in 
the  extraordinary  part  of  the  Biblical  Prophets.  Here  we 
see  men  without  any  public  office  or  any  artificial  authority, 
assume  such  a  formidable  sway  and  wield  it  with  such 
eclat,  such  indomitable  perseverance,  for  such  a  length  of 


22  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

time,  and  with  such  stupendous  results.    The  prophetic  role 
is  quite  unique  in  the  history  of  mankind;  the   only  key 
to  it  is :  first,  that  original  democratic  spirit,  and  next,  the 
exalted  purity  and  disinterestedness  which   characterized 
those  truly  holy  personages,  by  far  superior  to  the  tribunes 
of  Rome.     Men  sprung  from  the  lowly  ranks  of  the  people, 
with   the   thunder   of  Jahveh  vibrating  upon   their  lips, 
boldly  tearing  off  the  mask  from  king,  grandee  and  priest, 
in  the  name  of  God,  honesty  and  truth,  whose  lightnings 
burn  in  their  bosoms.     Did  you  ever  realize  the  magnan- 
imity of   Nathan   addressing    the   conqueror  David,  on   a 
most   delicate   occasion,  with   "'Thou  art  the  man?"     Or 
Elijah's  defiance  of  the  Kings  and  Queens  of  Israel  ?     Or 
Jeremiah's  denunciation  of  the  iniquities  of  Jerusalem  ?  We 
admire   the   courage   of    a   Demosthenes   or   Cicero,   of   a 
Schiller,  Lessing   or  Victor   Hugo,   boldly   affronting   the 
wrath  of  mob  and  prince.     They  cannot  compare  with  the 
self-sacrifice  of  the  Hebrew  prophets.     Now  the  source  of 
their  sublimity  and  virtue  is  to  be  found  in  the  Mosaic 
democracy.    Democracy  alone  inspires  the  citizen  with  such 
unselfishness,  such  heroism.     Democracy  alone  breathes  into 
us  true  and  pure   love  for   our  fellows.     There   alone   we 
feel  patriotism  and  self-interest  fused  into  one ;   for  there 
alone  our  fellows  are  our  family.     ^Ye  toil  and  sacrifice  for 
them,  as  our  brothers  and  kinsmen.     We  feel,  work  and 
lioard  for  our  dearest ;  not  for  a  cold-hearted  tyrant.     Mon- 
archies   produce    brilliant   courtiers;    Democracies   create 
great  patriots  and  prophets. 

Leaders  and  Orators  Elsewhere. 

The  great  orators  and  tribunes  of  Greece  and  Rome  have 
often  been  compared  to  the  Ebrew  prophets.  But,  super- 
naturalism  not  considered  now,  looked  upon  from  the 
purely  human  standpoint,  we  must  give  the  palm  of  victory 
to  the  biblical   prophets,  not  to  the  tribunes  of  Rome  or 


LEADERS    AND   ORATORS   ELSEWHERE.  23 

Athens.  Ten  to  one,  these  latter  ones  were  demagogues, 
brilliant  rhetoricians  and  ambitious  politicians,  who 
harangued  for  office,  money  and  self-aggrandizement.  For 
one  Aristides,  Demosthenes  and  Epaminondas  you  will  find 
a  hundred  venal  orators.  For  one  or  two  Gracchi  you  will 
find  scores  of  Catalines  and  Antonios.  Even  with  the  best 
of  them  was  not  absolute  right  and  purity  the  aim,  but 
the  interest  of  their  State,  viz.,  their  caste.  The  overlauded 
Cato  hired  out  his  fair  slaves  to  the  highest  bidder.  He 
was  ever  ready  with  his  Carthago  delenda  est,  without 
reflecting  whether  she  had  not  as  much  right  to  exist  as 
Rome  herself;  and/when  his  caste  was  beaten,  he  suicided. 
I  can  see  there  no  special  sublimity  in  the  sitblimized  Cato. 
Nor  can  the  Homeric  nor  the  Virgilian  soothsayers  and 
Sibyllas  hold  out  any  comparison.  I  could  never  get  serious 
at  the  frantic  outpourings  of  the  heathen  mantis  and  vates. 
They  strongly  savor  of  nonsense  and  deceit.  They  were  the 
tools  of  kingcraft  and  priestcraft.  So  was  the  Greek  Calchas, 
so  Valeda  the  German.  Otherwise  are  the  biblical  prophets, 
tribunes  of  the  people  indeed.  Whether  you  believe  or 
not,  you  cannot  help  being  thrilled  with  deep  emotion  and 
sympathy  at  the  burden  of  their  message.  You  feel  they 
are  inspired  by  the  true  interests  of  the  people ;  by  justice 
and  right  universal;  by  truth,  purity  and  goodness.  Do 
they  speak  for  themselves,  or  even  for  their  caste  and  class  ? 
No;  they  often  harangue  against  their  personal  interests; 
against  the  masters,  and  against  the  majority.  They  live  on 
roots  ;  sleep  on  stones ;  hide  in  the  wilderness ;  at  the  mercy 
of  wind  and  wave,  with  hunger  and  death  staring  into  their 
faces ;  but  they  yield  not,  hide  not,  hush  not  up.  They 
bring  the  message  of  truth,  or  of  warning,  or  of  consolation, 
to  those  needing  it.  Read  the  harangues  of  Moses^ 
Isaiah,  Micha,  Jeremiah.  "  Listen,  O  ye  heavens,  hear,  O 
earth,  for  God  speaks  !  Children,  I  have  reared  and  exalted 
— but  they  rebelled.     Listen,  O  ye  princes  of  Sodom.    What 


^lcf~c^     4£>     Cci^  ^ Ji' £rtt  »x^  e^ 


24  SPIRIT    OF   THE   BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

for  to  me  your  many  sacrifices  ?  I  have  enough  of  your  burnt 
offerings.  Bring  no  more  of  your  falsehood — gifts  and 
hypocrisy — incense.  ...  Do  away  with  your  wicked 
deeds;  learn  to  do  good;  search  for  truth  and  justice; 
encourage  the  oppressed,  plead  for  the  orphan  and  the 
widow.  If  willing  and  obeying,  you  shall  enjoy  the  fat  of 
the  land ;  if  not,  the  sword  is  ready  for  you  .  .  .  Thus 
speaks  Jahveh."  (Isaiah  I.)  The  Bible  contains  a  thou- 
sand such  addresses.  They  ring  from  the  deep  recesses  of 
a  heart,  brimful  with  truth,  purity  and  sympathy.  Now, 
such  men,  such  words,  such  holiness,  could  grow  only  in  the 
soil  of  genuine  democracy. 

The  Biblical  and  the  Non-Biblical  State. 

This  striking  contrast  between  the  biblical  State  and  the 
non-biblical  one  is  easily  explained  by  looking  at  the  ethical 
basis  of  each.  The  first  was  built  upon  Monotheism ;  the 
last  upon  Polytheism.  The  one  has  as  its  foundation  an  all- 
just  and  benign  God,  hence  is  right  and  benevolence  the 
rale  of  the  State  and  the  ideal  of  the  citizen ;  the  other 
has  force  and  interest  for  its  pedestal,  hence  the  individual, 
the  woman,  child,  foreigner,  weak,  conquered,  etc.,  are 
without  rights.  The  State  alone  is  strong,  and  to  him 
belongs  all.  The  prince  there  is  free,  is  infallible.  What 
serves  his  advantage  is  right ;  he  can  never  be  wrong — as 
long  as  he  is  strong.  So  taught  Machiavelli  :  "  Everything 
is  permissible  to  the  prince,  if  advantageous."  So  is  arson, 
poison,  treachery,  perjury,  unjust  wars,  breach  of  word, 
incest,  assassination — all.  Upon  that  basis  acted  the  Tiberias, 
the  Neros,  the  Borgias  of  old  and  modern  times.  As  to  the 
subject  of  the  ancient  State,  he  had  but  one  virtue,  one  merit 
and  one  distinction,  viz.,  patriotism.  His  conscience,  feel- 
ings and  thoughts  were  absorbed  by  patriotism ;  to  contribute 
to  the  greatness  of  the  State,  or  prince,  was  his  only  merit ; 
that  was  superseding  all  other  virtue  and  morality.     The 


THE    ROMAN    AND   THE    JUD^AN    CITIZEN.  25 

Bible,  on  the  contrary,  basing  upon  right,  exacted  justice 
from  people,  State,  prince  and  noble,  and,  if  neglected,  let 
loose  upon  them  the  flaming  tongue  of  its  prophets,  its 
orators,  its  leading  priests. 

The  Roman  and  the  Jud^ean  Citizen. 

A  few  well-known  facts  from  history  will  illustrate  this 
difference  of  the  Mosaic  State  from  the  Pagan  one.  A  Spar- 
tan mother  loses  her  three  sons  on  the  battlefield,  and 
repudiates  the  fourth,  because  he  had  lost  his  buckler,  with 
his  three  brothers. — Brutus  the  elder  delivers  over  his  sons 
to  death,  because  of  their  suspected  intrigues  with  the  ban- 
ished king — i.  e.  the  State  deadens  a  parent's  heart,  the 
citizen  stifles  a  parent's  feelings. — The  three  pairs  of  the 
Horaces  and  Curiaces  fight  the  mortal  battle  of  their  respec- 
tive countries.  The  last  Horacius,  victorious,  murders  his 
sister  for  bewailing  her  betrothed  Curiace — and  receives 
the  laurel  wreath,  notwithstanding. — Mucius  Scaevola  burns 
his  hand  off  on  a  slow  coal-fire,  in  order  to  deceive  the 
enemy  into  a  precipitate  retreat,  for  nature  must  be  silent 
in  presence  of  the  State.  Thus  the  Moloch,  called  the  State, 
obtained  the  mastery  over  and  the  total  sacrifice  of  all  sym- 
pathetic feelings ;  over  all  morality  and  nature  itself. 

Another  was  the  ideal  of  the  Biblical  Society.  The  object 
there  was  not  a  great  State,  but  a  great  nation  teeming  with 
noble  individuals.  Not  force,  but  goodness,  was  aimed  at. 
The  highest  ideal  was,  therefore,  duty,  justice,  conscience — 
the  "  voice  of  GodP  For  these  the  citizen  must  be  ready  to 
die.  State  interest  could  not  stifle  them.  What  an  immense 
advance  in  the  Mosaic  Society  over  the  most  boasted  ones 
of  Persia,  Greece  and  Rome  !  Compare  the  crooked  ways  and 
petty  jealousies  of  the  several  leading  cities  and  leading  men 
of  Greece  in  their  fratricidal  struggles  for  selfish  liegemony. 
Compare  the  crooked  jiolicy  of  the  leading  patricians  of 
Rome  in  their  conquest  of  the  world.     Compare  the  aims 


26 


SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 


and  means  of  its  later  leaders  and  imperatores.  For  one 
lionest  Galba,  Trajan  or  Julian,  liow  many  Neros  and  Cal- 
igulas  and  Ottos?  Nay,  Judsea  was  infinitely  beyond 
Athens  and  Rome  in  true  moral  j^randeur.  So,  our  Frank- 
lins and  Washingtons,  Lafayettes  and  Neckers,  Steins  and 
Carnots,  took  their  models  in  Jerusalem,  not  in  Rome,  nor 
Athens,  nor  in  the  Persian  serag-lio. 

Biblical  Patriotism. 

Let  us  return  to  the  biblical  patriotism.  The  Judsean 
citizen  cherished  the  State  that  protected  himself,  the  ashes 
of  his  fathers  and  the  cradle  of  his  children.  He  would 
willingly  die  for  it.  Hundreds  of  thousands  did  die  in  the 
defense  of  the  first  Jewish  empire ;  millions  in  that  of  the 
second  one.  They  died  fighting  in  Judaea,  Parthia,  Baby- 
lonia, Egypt,  Africa,  etc.  They  died  since  then  on  a 
thousand  battlefields.  The  Judsean  knew  how  to  die,  heroic- 
ally, for  the  State  that  has  well  deserved  of  him.  Yet 
patriotism  is  but  one  virtue  out  of  a  hundred  equally 
sacred.  The  State  does  not  absorb  our  bei?ng  nor  our  moral 
sense.  There  is  but  one  thing  absolutely  sacred :  that  is 
duty.  You  remember  the  family  picture — Abraham,  ready 
for  the  sacrifice  of  his  son  Isaac,  hears  the  divine  behest 
calling:  "Do  not  touch  thy  son,  for  I  do  know  that  thou 
wilt  obey  My  voice:'  The  Ebrew  gracefully  yielded  life 
when  duty  dictated.  So  teaches  the  Talmud :  "  For  three 
things  a  man  shall  die  and  not  trespass  :  Idolatry,  murder 
and  unchastity." 

The  nation  and  the  citizen,  not  the  State,  being  the  aim 
of  the  biblical  patriot,  he  would  sometimes  drop  the  latter 
to  save  the  former.  So  did  Jeremiah  advise  the  Babylonian 
exiles  to  identify  themselves  with  their  new  homes.  (Jere- 
miah 29,  6).  So  did  he  repeatedly  advise  the  Judaeans  to 
surrender  to  King  Nebuchadnezzar,  spare  themselves  and 
hope  and  wait  for  better  times.     So  did,  seven   centuries 


STRENGTH   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LAW.  27 

later,  Rabbi  Johanan  ben  Sakkai  steal  away  in  a  coifin  from 
the  tottering  walls  of  Jerusalem,  besieged  by  Titus,  and  save 
the  nation  by  erecting  his  school  at  Jamnia.  Whilst  that 
grand,  pathetic  legend  of  the  mother  stoically  witnessing 
the  tortures  of,  and  encouraging  her  seven  sons  in  adhering 
to  their  inherited  faith,  shows  us  in  strikingly  lurid  colors 
the  Ebrew  ideal  of  self-sacrifice  for  duty.  Thus  we  recog- 
nize that  the  Bible  has  given  to  the  world  not  alone 
Monotheism,  but  a  phalanx  of  other  ideas  not  less  fruitful 
of  human  happiness.  Among  these  are  the  principles  of 
a  free  State  and  free  citizenship,  of  human  dignity,  of  indi- 
vidual freedom,  of  social  equality,  of  man's  equal  rights 
and.  duties,  of  freedom  of  the  woman,  of  charity  as  a  duty 
to  the  poor,  the  weak,  the  stranger,  the  orphan  and  the 
widow — basing  society  upon  right  and  sympathy,  not 
force  and  egoism. 

Strength  of  the  Biblical  Law. 

Compare  these  laws  with  other  legislations  of  even  the 
proudest  nations,  and  you  will  easily  find  out  the  cause  why 
these  latter  have  disappeared  under  the  dust  of  ages,  or  have 
been  wiped  out  in  the  collapse  of  decaying  races ;  whilst  the 
Bible  is  alive,  silently  gaining  over  and  permeating  man- 
kind, revered  as  the  word  of  God.  For  what  is  good  now 
and  thousands  of  years  ago,  good  for  all  ages,  countries  and 
conditions — that  is  divine,  that  is  dictated  by  the  spirit  of 
God,  the  universal  mind. 

We  may  further  learn  from  the  above  that  only  what  is 
God's  word,  what  is  just  and  holy,  and  good  for  all,  not  for 
the  few,  is  lasting  and  enduring.  Hence,  that  not  chance, 
blind  force  or  cunning  prevail,  but  an  all-wise  law,  a  provi- 
dential plan,  as  suggested  by  the  Bible  perhaps  identical 
with  evolution,  governs  and  permeates  human  history.  That 
is  one  of  the  grand  traits  of  that  great  book,  running  through 
all  of  its  parts  and  chapters  and  verses;  through  laws, 
moralists  or  historians,  that  not  chance  or  force  or  cunning 


28  SPIRIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

govern  the  world  and  man,  but  an  all-wise  Supreme  Being, 
providing  for  the  eternal  fitness  of  things.  In  the  long  run 
only  the  just  and  the  wise  will  be  triumphant.  The  heathen 
view  was  the  very  opposite.  The  gods  are  not  just  and  wise. 
Fate  is  stronger  than  even  Zeus,  and  fate  is  blind  accident, 
or  at  best  brute  force,  a  crushing  necessity.  Pre-ordained  ? 
Arranged?  That  is,  distinctly,  never  stated.  Eternal  fitness 
of  things  is  not  fate.  For  neither  human  reason  nor  divine 
wisdom  ever  attempted  to  raise  the  veil  of  fate.  Yet  it  is 
the  supreme  power,  unscrutable  and  blind,  in  whose  pres- 
ence Zeus  himself  trembles.  Now,  that  is  a  most  desolate 
doctrine,  not  true,  baffling  all  human  effort  and  all  wisdom. 
It  is  most  dangerous  to  a  virtuous,  serene  life.  It  is  a  theory 
for  daring  Prometheus,  Alexander  or  Napoleon  I.  The  Bible 
doctrine  of  a  just,  all-wise  Providence  is  more  favorable  to 
both,  to  human  virtue  and  human  happiness.  Hence  more 
appropriate  to  underlie  the  foundations  of  a  State. 


PART  II. 
SOCIAL  EQUALITY. 

Have  the  ancient  times  not  been  cognizant  of  the  principle 
of  individual  liberty  and  human  dignity,  much  less  did  they 
know  the  other  principle,  the  necessary  complement  there- 
of, viz.,  social  equality.  The  equality  as  to  rights  and 
duties  of  the  different  members  composing  the  community 
was  entirely  foreign  to  the  ancient  world. 

Society  was  one  great  hierarchy,  one  great  chain  of  subor- 
dination, where  every  link  had  its  superior  and  its  inferior 
link:  the  king,  the  high-priest,  the  general,  the  princes, 
the  nobles,  the  soldiers,  the  officials,  the  proprietors,  the 
mechanics,  the  peasants,  the  slaves.  T7iis  is  the  "  militant 
social  type.''^^^^ 

In  earlier  times  this  hierarchy  was  not  only  personal  ; 
no,  it  descended  from   father  to  son   and  grandson.     The 

(1)  Herbert  Spencer. 


MAX-SERVANT.  29 

entire  number  of  inhabitants  were  divided  into  castes  or 
sharply  differentiated  classes  of  people,  and  it  was  not  per- 
mitted to  pass  from  one  class  into  another.  If  your  father 
was  a  soldier,  you  would  be  but  a  soldier;  if  a  tailor,  your 
children  had  to  be  tailors,  and  nothing  else.  Nor  was  inter- 
marriage allowed  between  different  castes.  Mosaism  alone 
of  all  antiquity  knows  not  of  this  hierarchy.  Every  one 
was  as  good  as  his  neighbor.  Every  one  could  choose  his 
own  calling.  Everyone  could  cumulate  or  change  his  occu- 
pations, if  he  thought  he  could  do  so  profitably.  There 
was  indeed  an  official  priesthood  belonging  to  a  particular 
family,  but  they  never  ruled,  as  elsewhere.  The  judges, 
the  soldiers,  the  generals,  and  later  the  kings,  the  teachers, 
the  prophets,  did  not  belong  to  any  caste;  they  came  from 
every  class  and  every  rank  of  the  people,  as  part  and  parcel 
of  tlie  people.  In  the  kingdom  of  Judaea  the  more  conserva- 
tive part  of  Israel,  there  did  spring  up  a  dynasty  and  an 
aristocracy,  but  it  never  degenerated  into  a  caste.  The 
different  estates  of  nobles,  priests,  Levites  and  Israelites 
did  always  intermarry  and  occupy  alike  any  position.  The 
principle  of  social  equality,  of  the  same  laws,  same  rights 
and  same  duties  for  all,  was  first  recognized  by  Moses  three 
thousand  years  ago.  Thus  individual  liberty  and  social 
equality  both  mankind  owes  to  the  Bible. 

Man-Servant. 

Which  are  the  passages  applying  to  social  equality?  Let 
us  first  review  the  verses  mentioned  above,  but  now  con- 
sidered from  the  social  standpoint.  (Exodus  21,  2).  '^  When 
thou  wilt  buy  an  Ebrew  servant,  he  shall  serve  for  six  years; 
in  the  seventh  he  shall  go  out  free,  without  compensation." 
Why  so  ?  Because  all  Ebrews  are  and  remain  equal  before 
the  laws.  Because  manhood-rights  and  equality  are  origi- 
nal and  fundamental  principles. 

We  read  in  Levit.  25, 39 :  "  AVhen  thy  brother  has  impover- 
ished and  becomes  thy  servant,  let  him  not  do  any  slave 


30  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

work,  treat  him  as  a  hired  servant.  With  the  Jubilee  he 
shall  go  free  and  return  to  his  family  acre — "for  my  ser- 
vants are  the  Israelites."  To  which  Rashi  adds :  "  Israel 
is  God's  servant,  not  the  slave  of  slaves."  How  magnani- 
mous !  What  a  generous  pride !  The  ancient  state  was  one 
long  chain  of  social  inequality.  First  came  the  Pontifex 
Maximus,  then  the  Emperor,  the  provincial  ruler,  the  duke, 
the  baron,  the  monk,  the  soldier,  the  burgher,  at  last  the 
Jew,  upon  whom  all  trampled.  "  I  defy  all  your  hierarchy," 
shouted,  proudly,  Rashi,  the  great  commentator,  "I  serve 
not  burgher,  soldier,  monk,  baron,  king  or  pope ;  I  obey 
none  but  God.  You  rob  me  of  my  rights,  my  honors,  my 
share  of  the  land,  yea,  of  the  warm  sunlight  and  the  fresh 
air,  yet  you  can't  make  me  a  slave.  The  Ebrew  is  but 
God's  servant."  Thus  spoke  a  Jewish  writer  in  the  eleventh 
century.  This  is  the  fruit  of  Mosaic  social  equality,  viz., 
human  dignity,  elasticity  of  mind,  energy  under  adverse 
circumstances.  The  mob  was  happy  in  feeling  the  Jew 
lower  than  themselves.  The  Jew  proved  free  in  his  very 
chains.  "  I  am  the  servant  of  God,  freer  than  all  your 
hierarchy,  and  am  not  the  slave  of  slaves." 

Woman-Servant. 

(Exod.  21,  7.) — "When  a  man  will  sell  his  daughter — as  a 
help— she  shall  not  be  treated  as  male  servants,  but  the 
acquisition  of  her  services  imply  the  expectation  of  ulti- 
mate wedlock.  If  not,  she  leaves  without  compensating 
the  master."  Why  so  ?  Because  the  law  guarantees  the 
equality  of  man  and  woman ;  and  more  so  because,  as  in 
our  United  States,  Judaea  allowed  to  woman  even  privileges. 
She  being  the  weaker  party,  the  law  was  especially  solicit- 
ous for  her.  The  ancient  world  allowed  the  father  to  sell 
his  child-daughter.  Yes,  says  the  Mosaic  law,  he  can  sell, 
i.  e.,  deliver  her  to   her  husband,  not   to   a   master.     The 


RIGHT    OF    ASYLUM.  31 

Eabbis,  in  the  same  sense,  add :    "  Woman  rises  with  her 
husband,  but  never  descends  with  him."  (^) 

Grime  and  Murder. 

(Exod.  21,  12)—"  Who  smites  a  man,  that  dies  by  it,  shall 
himself  be  put  to  death."  No  difference  of  rank,  class  or 
nativity,  nor  is  a  money  compensation  admitted.  All  other 
ancient  legislators  discriminated,  whether  patrician  or 
plebeian,  yjatron  or  client,  native  or  alien,  free-born  or  slave. 
They  allowed  compensation,  which  alone  is  a  token  of 
social  inequality.  (Exod.  21,  13) — "When  the  killing  was 
not  Intentional,  but  accidental,  then  the  innocent  man- 
slayer  shall  have  the  chance  and  right  of  asylum.  He 
shall  not  be  the  victim  of  blood-revenge  at  the  hands  of  the 
relatives  of  the  killed  person."  The  blood-revenge,  i.  e.,  to 
avenge  a  relative  killed,  was  universally  acknowledged  as 
the  first  duty  of  kinship.  Social  opinion  was  inexorable 
thereupon.  Mosaism  mitigated  it.  The  intentional  killing 
is  murder,  and  can  be  expiated  only  by  the  death  of  the 
murderer.  The  accidental  slaying  was  sufl3.ciently  atoned 
by  exile;  hence  the  right  of  asylum.  Thus  it  states  (Exod. 
21,  14) :  "  When  a  man  will  intentionally  waylay  his 
neighbor  and  kill  him,  then  take  him  from  my  altar  to 
die."  The  ancients  abused  the  right  of  asylum,  granting  it 
indiscriminately  even  to  the  worst  criminals,  especially  to 
powerful  ones.  The  Mosaic  law  allowed  the  use  and  dis- 
carded the  abuse,  sheltering  the  innocent,  never  the  guilty, — 
because  of  social  equality. 

Right  of  Asylum. 

So  the  ancient  world  guaranteed  immunity  to  criminals 
w^ho  succeeded  in  escaping  to  some  famous  temple.  That 
of  Diana,  Apollo,  Jupiter  Ammon,  etc.,  were  such.  There 
were  in  Christendom  hundreds  of  places  of  refuge  during 

■  rhv^  Dy  mnv  n^i  n^iy  hb'n   (i) 


32  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  Middle  Ages  tliat  screened  the  thief,  the  murderer,  the 
political  intriguer,  from  just  punishment.  Ecclesiastical 
Eome  abounded  in  such  holy  asylums.  Many  churches 
and  abbeys  became  thus  the  dens  of  all  the  outlaws  and 
desperadoes,  whilst  criminal  priests  were  never  delivered 
to  the  arm  of  public  justice.  The  Bible  of  three  thousand 
years  ago,  on  the  contrary,  ignored  such  privileges  of  places 
or  persons.  With  awful  rigor,  it  states  :  "  From  my  altar 
take  the  criminal  to  his  deserved  punishment."  Crime  shall 
not  be  sheltered  by  the  sanctity  of  place.  Crime  at  the  altar 
is  doubly  hateful.  It  defiles  the  altar,  and  cannot  be  purified 
by  it.  The  Bible  thus  allows  no  compensation  and  no 
immunity  to  places  or  persons ;  no  chicanery,  no  tricks,  no 
asking.  Who  was  the  killer  and  who  the  killed  one? 
whether  the  murderer  belonged  to  a  powerful  or  rich 
family  ?  no  quibbling  about  murder  in  "  first  or  second 
degree" — the  loopholes  of  trickery.  Our  criminal  cases 
offer  what  dilemmas,  monstrosities,  surprises,  as  if  justice 
were  blind  and  deaf.  If  the  jury  had  before  their  eyes 
these  plain,  lucid,  unsophisticated  verses,  there  would  be 
no  room  for  chicanery,  bribery  and  venal  oratory.  They 
would  see  their  way  clear,  wrong  would  be  punished  and 
innocence  avenged,  and  the  jury  institution,  one  of  the  most 
glorious  bulwarks  of  liberty,  would  not  be  so  often  discred- 
ited as  it  is.  The  lawyer  triumphs  when  succeeding  to 
whitewash  a  murderer,  not  caring  for  innocence  unavenged, 
justice  ashamed  and  lynch  law  calling  for  self-help. 

Penal  Laws. 

"  Who  smites  a  man  that  dies,  shall  be  killed."  (^)  (Exod. 
21,  12  and  23).  "  Who  kills  shall  be  killed.  Life  for  life." 
Even  so  the  Talmud  declares  the  death  penalty  for  murder, 
as  also  for  other  capital  crimes  against  the  State  and  society, 
as  will  be  ascertained  in  other  places.     Modern  over-senti- 

•  c'Dj  nnn  ^^'dj  ,nov  mo  n»i  ^'n  n^o   (i) 


CAPITAL    PUNISHMENT. 


33 


mentality  is  against  capital  pnnisliment.  How  to  screen 
society  against  tigers  in  Imman  shape?  Wliy  be  sentimen- 
tal to  the  criminal  and  callous  to  the  innocent  victim? 
How  to  deter  from  crime?  That  is  not  satisfactorily 
answered.  Imprisonment  for  life,  hard  labor,  deportation 
to  Siberia  or  Cayenne  is  costly,  probably  more  cruel  and. 
unsafe  and  not  striking  enough. 

Capital  Punishment  and  Striking  Examples. 

The  Bible  is  practical.  It  aims  at  satisfying  both,  the 
wronged  party  as  much  as  the  public.  The  feeling  of 
revenge,  if  moderated,  is  natural  and  wise.  Its  substratum 
is  the  instinct  of  self-defense.  Every  one  feels  the  law  of 
equity  in  his  bosom,  the  wrong-doer  and  the  wrong  sufferer. 
The  first  feels  deterred,  the  other  encouraged  by  it.  Hence 
is  sentimentality  for  the  murderer  both  wrong  and  foolish. 
Next  is  the  punishment  of  crime  the  safeguard  for  society 
at  large.  Capital  punishment  reassures  best  outraged 
society,  for  it  does  it  strikingly.  Imprisonment,  deportation 
does  it  not.  An  embezzler  in  a  Canada  hotel  encourages 
thieves ;  in  jail  and  in  the  criminal's  jacket  he  deters.  J.  J. 
Rousseau  narrates  that  in  order  to  show  his  pupil  ^'■Emile" 
the  consequences  of  lewdness,  he  called  with  him  at  a 
hospital  of  veneric  diseases. — Will  you  make  a  young  girl 
conscious  of  the  dangers  of  gallantry,  take  her  to  a  repre- 
sentation of  Victor  Hugo's  "  Rigoletto."  There  is  nothing 
so  effective  as  objective  lessons,  and  quick  punishment  is  the 
best  object  lesson.  It  is  a  powerful  motive  with  the  Bible 
in  punishing,  that  "  They  shall  hear  and  fear."  (^)  The 
defaulting  bank  cashier  running  away  with  his  prey,  is  poor 
consolation  to  the  depositors.  To  deter  the  evil  propensities 
from  crime,  the  punishment  must  be  quick,  striking,  public, 
and  serve  as  an  example  of  rash  acts  followed  by  stern 
consequences.     The  fashion  of  newspapers  lionizing  a  bold 

."iKT'i  lyoK'^  |yD^   (1) 


34  SPIRIT    OF    THK    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

criminal,  reporting'  daily  about  him,  as  a  hero,  or  a  victim, 
is  most  mischievous.  Guiteau,  the  murderer  of  Garfield, 
was  quite  as  much  talked  about  as  that  noble  patriot  him- 
self. He  was  presented  to  the  vulgar  as  a  sensation,  and  all 
the  roughs  and  the  idiots  mistook  it  for  glory.  The  only 
tenderness  the  Talmud  has  for  such  a  man  is  a  quick  death. 
They  say:  "Love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  means  here: 
'''choose  for  him  a  proper  death."  (^). 

In  our  times  of  huge  standing  armies,  incessant  dynastic 
wars  and  crushing  competition,  where  wealth  goes  to  the 
wealthy,  and  starvation  to  the  poor,  where  plutocracy  on 
one  hand,  and  pauperism  on  the  other,  have  created  the 
most  tremendous  Social  question,  absorbing  all  other  polit- 
ical dilemmas,  in  such  an  age,  the  biblical  common  sense 
axiom  of  "  Who  kills  shall  be  killed  "  is  good  enough.  As 
to  the  future,  let  it  take  care  of  Itself.  The  future  may 
better  provide  against  crime  and  too  cruel  punishment. 

Filial  Disrespect. 

Exod.  21:15  and  17:  "Whosoever  smites  his  father  and 
mother,  or  even  curses  them,  shall  die."  That  law  appears 
to  be  of  a  draconic  rigor.  Yet  in  primitive,  rude  socieiies 
it  was  just  and  salutary.  Later  traditions  added  their 
accompanying  qualifications.  The  Talmud  requires  (San- 
hedrin  SS*")  in  such  cases,  the  majority  of  the  culprit,  a 
solemn  warning,  in  presence  of  witnesses,  and  a  visible 
wound  inflicted,  in  presence  of  witnesses,  and  that  in  spite  of 
the  express  warning  and  the  announcement  of  the  resultant 
punishment,  as  also  many  other  restrictions  fully  answering 
to  the  purpose.  Now,  when  a  grown  person,  in  full  reason, 
in  quiet  temper,  well  forewarned,  is  so  abundant  and  so 
conscience-seared,  so  obdurnte,  and  beastly,  when  no  longer 
needing  the  sustenance  and  help  of  a  parent,  to  forget  all  the 
tender  and  most  sacred  ties  of  blood,  gratitude,  reverence, 

■ns'  nn'o  "b  113  ,"Ti»3  iy~i^  nanxi   (i) 


MAN-STEALING.  35 

and  to  curse  and  smite  a  parent — that  shows  of  the  utmost 
depravity;  and  society  has  no  interest  in  sparing  such  a 
monster.  Modern  times  have  been  busily  at  work  in 
undermining  filial  piety.  I  am  afraid  modern  times  have 
gone  too  far.  Beware!  American  society  especially,  beware  ! 
The  French  philosopher  Jules  Simon,  of  late  gave  a  sad 
picture  of  the  reverence  and  filial  piety  in — America  especi- 
ally. 

Man-Stealing. 

Exod.  21,  16.) — "  Who  kidnaps  a  person  and  sells  him,  or 
detains  him  in  his  power,  shall  die."  Now,  remember  this 
law  was  enacted  over  three  thousand  years  ago,  at  a  time 
when  slavery  was  universal,  conquest  legitimate,  the  right 
of  the  stronger  fully  acknowledged,  equality  unknown.  At 
such  a  time  the  Mosaic  legislator  declared  man  stealing  a 
capital  crime.  Ii  may  be  caviled,  he  meant  but  stealing  a 
fellow  Ebrew,  a  free,  civilized  being,  a  grown  person,  a 
man — Yir-Ish  in  Ebrew — not  a  child  or  woman,  but  that  is 
caviling  and  belittling.  The  plain  face  of  the  verse  is : 
"  Whosoever  kidnaps  a  person  shall  die."  Should  even  the 
interpretation,  by  the  standard  of  antiquity,  restrict  the 
range  of  the  word  Ish-Yir,  nevertheless  the  absolute  sense 
thereof  is  universal,  sweeping,  covering  all  cases,  per- 
sons, sexes  and  races,  and  thus  be  a  solemn  declaration 
against  all  kinds  of  man-stealing  and  enslaving.  Let  me 
here  invoke  on  behalf  of  liberalism  the  current  theory  of 
Inspiration.  I  admit  that  ancient  and  more  modern  times 
did  restrain  the  sense  of  that  verse  to  prohibiting  only  the 
kidnapping  of  a  fellow-citizen;  but  why  should  not  the 
modern  interpreter  take  the  verse  in  a  universal  and 
absolute  sense,  befitting  all  times  and  cases  and  truly  worthy 
of  the  Deity?— 


36  spirit  of  the  biblical  legislation. 

Maltreating  a  Slave. 
(Exod.  21,  20.) — "When  a  man  will  smite  his  male  or 
female  slave  with  a  rod — not  with  a  dangerous  weapon — 
and  they  die  under  his  hand,  they  shall  be  avenared."  The 
Eabbinical  tradition  is  :  ''The  murderer  shall  suffer  capital 
punishment  by  the  sword."  That  slave  is,  of  course,  a  non- 
Ebrew  bondsman.  For,  as  to  the  Ebrew  servant,  acquired 
but  for  six  years'  work,  that  needed  no  special  law,  his  life 
wasguaranteedbythe  previous  general  axiom. — (Exod.  21, 12): 
"  Who  kills  shall  be  killed."—"  But,  if  the  slave,  beaten  by 
his  master,  remain  alive  and  erect  for  a  day  or  two,  then — 
capital  punishment,  according  to  tradition — such  a^enge- 
ment  shall  not  take  place,  since  the  slave  was  his  property 
and  bought  by  him"  (Exod.  21,  21),  he  losing  his  money 
anyhow.  Here  is  a  concession  to  social  conditions.  The 
master  could  buy  bondsmen  and  hold  them,  hence  he  must 
be  permitted  to  chastise  them,  when  necessary,  with  a  rod, 
not  with  a  dangerous  weapon.  If,  long  afterwards,  death 
ensues,  he  loses  his  property  anyhow.  Follows  there  no 
other  punishment?  W^ait  and  read  further :  (Exod.  21,  26,  27,) 
"  When  a  man  knocks  out  the  eye,  or  even  the  tooth  of  his 
slave,  he  shall  let  him  go  free  in  compensation  for  liis  eye 
or  his  tooth."  Here  is  social  equality.  The  Bible  originally 
declared  all  men  free  and  equal,  all  entitled  to  liberty  and 
happiness,  all  made  in  the  image  of  God,  all  offspring  of 
the  same  parental  couple  ^Gen.  1,  9),  yet  it  tolerated  the 
social  institution  of  slavery,  but  tried  by  all  means  to  safe- 
guard the  slave  as  much  as  it  could.  Of  course,  in  those 
remote  times  naaster  and  slave  were  of  the  same  physio- 
logical race.  Spartan  and  Helot,  Ebrew  and  Gibeonite 
belonged  to  the  same  stock  and  clime.  That  fierce  antago- 
nism, as  between  Caucasian  or  not,  civilized  and  not  civil- 
ized, etc.,  was  not  yet  developed,  and  cannot  be  taken  here 
into  consideration.  The  non-Caucasian  races  were  simply 
never  contemplated  in  the  Pentateuch. 


eye  for  eye  and  democracy.  37 

Eye  for  Eye  and  Democracy. 

Tlie  democratic  spirit  of,  and  the  higli  sens8  for  rigid  and 
equal  justice  of  Mosaism,  is  particularly  illustrated  by  the 
legal  axiom  expressed  in  Exod.  21,  24:  "Eye  for  eye, tooth 
for  tooth,  (')  hand  for  hand,  foot  for  foot,  burn  for  burn,  blow 
for  blow,  wound  for  wound."  Here  is  the  consecrated  prin- 
ciple of  retaliation,  the  legal  formula  of  natural  justice  and 
equity,  of  original  equality,  as  practiced  by  small  societies 
living  yet  in  a  state  of  nature,  following  yet  the  unsophis- 
ticated dictates  of  unbiased  conscience,  prompted  by  the 
inborn  instincts  of  talion,  as  deposited  in  our  breast  by  the 
Author  of  all,  before  conquests  and  castes  had  robbed 
man  of  his  pristine  sense  of  self-preservation.  That  formula 
has  been  decried  as  barbarous  and  harsh.  Yet  it  is  but  the 
strict  logical,  mathematical,  legal  expression  of  full  and 
untempered  equality  and  justice  before  the  law,  when  dis- 
passionately looked  at.  Consider :  If  one  man  is  as  good 
and  valued  as  much  as  another  man,  then  necessarily,  one 
man's  eye  is  as  valuable  as  another  one's  eye.  If  one  is 
equal  to  one,  then  one-tenth  part,  etc.,  is  equal  to  another 
one-tenth  part,  etc.  Whilst,  if,  instead  of  that  Mosaic 
axiom,  we  shall  put  fines  instead,  or  compensation,  as  a 
principle  of  law,  then  the  natural  equality  of  man  is 
destroyed.  For  the  rich  can  pay  $100  easier  tlian  the  poor 
can  pay  ^10.  Hence,  punishment  would  be  unequal.  The 
rich  would  pay  and  laugh  at  it;  the  poor  be  ruined  or 
oftener  submit  to  loss  of  life  or  limb.  In  both  ways  is 
equality  destroyed.  To  declare  the  value  of  each  and  every 
eye  to  be  $100,  would  not  be  equal  punishment,  for  the 
value  of  $100  is  vastly  different  to  the  rich  man  and  to  the 
poor  one.  Compensation  means,  therefore,  aristocracy. 
"  Eye  for  eye  "  is  democracy.  Thus,  "  eye  for  eye  and  tooth 
for  tooth,"   or  Jus  talionis,   is   the   legal   measure  of  the 

•pj?  nnn  py   (i) 


38  SPIRIT    OF   THE   BIB'LICAL    LEGISLATION. 

biblical  civil  and  criminal  law.  No  doubt  sympathy  will 
have  opportunities  to  demur.  In  practice  we  may  have 
occasion  to  deviate  from  it,  but  as  a  legal,  universal  axiom, 
it  can  not  be  impugned.  Justice  alone  is  equitable  to  both 
parties ;  sympathy  favors  one  party  and  wrongs  the  other. 
It  is  claimed  that  in  1888,  the  noble -hearted,  late  Cardinal 
Manning  demurred  against  that  axiom  on  the  following 
occasion :  Daring  a  time  of  popular  distress,  he  said  that 
the  law  of  '■'■Thou  slialt  not  steal^^  ''does  not  apply  to  a 
hungry  man  stealing  a  loaf  of  bread."  I  admit  that  Cardinal 
Manning  could  not  be  condemned  for  heresy  on  that  score. 
I  acknowledge  that  decision  does  honor  to  his  heart. 
Nevertheless,  could  we  accept  that  sentiment  as  a  principle 
of  law  ?  Where  should  we  draw  the  boundary  line  ?  A 
poor  man  stealing  a  loaf  is  pardonable,  and  a  poor  man 
stealing  a  dime  ?  stealing  a  dollar  ?  stealing  a  winter 
coat  ?  stealing  $50  to  pay  his  rent  ?  $200  to  start  in  busi- 
ness his  daughter?  steal  an  office  to  support  his  family? 
Some  years  ago  Maxwell  killed  his  friend,  needing  his 
diamonds.  Guiteau  murdered  Garfield  for  having  refused 
him  a  consulship,  much  needed.  Please  extend  the  line 
till  you  arrive  at  Cromwell  and  Napoleon  taking  a  crown — 
much  needed  by  them,  too !  .  .  .  No  doubt,  in  practice 
there  is  a  vast  difference  between  stealing  a  loaf  and  steal- 
ing a  crown.  In  theory,  "  eye  for  eye  and  tooth  for  tooth  " 
is  alone  a  safe  principle,  and  society  must  insist  upon  it. 

Compensation. 

But  it  will  be  asked,  "How  can  'eye  for  eye'  practically 
be  carried  out?"  May  not  the  offender  die  under  his 
punishment  ?  In  a  state  of  nature  that  would  be  no  serious 
objection. 

A  scandalous  author  being  asked  by  a  witty  judge,  ''why 
he  writes  such  objectionable  stuff,"  answered,  "I  must  live, 
sir."     And  the  judge  replied  :     "  I  do  not  see  the  necessity 


THE    OLD    AND    NEW   TESTAMENT.  39 

thereof."  Should  the  semi-murderer  fully  die,  he  could 
not  much  complain.  Let  the  rogue  bear  the  consequences 
of  his  viciousness.  But  it  is  true,  its  application  is  revolting 
to  civilized  society.  Well,  then,  in  civilized  society  the 
formula  of  iallon  remained  but  a  formula,  a  theorem. 

In  practice  the  principle  of  compensation  was  ruling.  The 
Rabbinical  tradition  was  that,  in  practice,  "eye  for  eye" 
meant  the  value  of  an  eye,  but  with  the  important  differ- 
ence that  equality,  the  democratic  principle,  nevertheless 
remained  safe-guarded.  For  the  fine  was  graded — not  equal 
for  poor  and  rich.  The  rich  and  the  poor  paid  in  propor- 
tion to  their  wealth  and  to  the  value  of  the  eye  to  the 
offended  party.  Thus  the  legislator  stated  the  rigid  prin- 
ciple of  retaliation,  leaving  to  the  judge  the  application  of 
the  law.  The  judge  determined  the  amount  of  compensa- 
tion, varying  proportionately,  always  keeping  in  view  the 
fact  that  $100  to  the  rich  is  no  heavier  than  |10  to  the 
poor,  etc. 

The  Old  and  New  Testament. 

A  great  deal  of  sentimentalism  has  been  wasted  on  that 
subject.  "  Behold  the  harshness  of  the  Old  Testament  in 
comparison  with  the  New  one."  The  one  says  :  "Love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself ; "  the  other,  "  Love  thine  enemy  too." 
The  one,  "Take  the  criminal  from  mine  altar  to  die;"  the 
other,  or  rather,  the  Church,  allowed  him  to  escape  into  a 
sacred  asylum  or  by  vicarious  atonement,  in  this  world  and 
hereafter.  The  one  says,  "  Tooth  for  tooth  ;  "  the  other,  "  If 
the  wicked  smites  thee  on  the  right  cheek,  offer  him  the  left 
one  too."  The  one,  "  The  thief  shall  pay  five  oxen  for  the 
one  stolen  ;  "  the  other,  "  If  he  steals  thy  coat,  give  him  thy 
mantle,  too,"  etc.  The  answer  is :  The  Old  Dispensation  is 
a  code  of  laws,  for  men  as  they  are,  for  a  political  State,  a 
real,  live  society,  with  the  actual,  human  passions  and  self- 
ishness, and  a  very  small  stock  of  charity.     Hence  are  rigid 


40  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

right  and  equity  rule  of  conduct.  The  New  Dispensation 
is  ideal,  for  man  as  he  might  be ;  its  principle  is  self-sacri- 
fice, altruism,  the  very  protest  against  man  as  he  is.  The 
Old  Testament  is  practical  law,  enacted  for  the  State  as  it 
is,  and  there  rigid  right  with  a  small  admixture  of  love  and 
charity,  can  reasonably  be  asked.  Or  else  every  one  will 
rely  upon  the  charity  of  others,  and  act  from  sheer  selfish- 
ness for  himself.  If  the  rich  should  work  and  give  all  to 
the  poor,  every  one  would  prefer  being  poor,  and  receive 
all  from  the  rich.  Now,  if  all  would  stop  work,  whence 
should  come  the  rich  ?  And  if  all  are  poor  and  lazy,  society 
will  soon  starve. 

Other  aims  are  pursued  by  the  New  Testament.  It  was 
intended  for  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  upon  earth,  with  self- 
sacrifice  as  its  leading  principle,  for  beatitude  in  the  here- 
after as  the  final  aim.  This  world  is  a  vale  of  tears,  tainted 
with  original  sin,  the  purgatory  of  the  future  Paradise.  It 
aimed  at  a  community  of  monastics  (the  Essenes),  living 
in  stoic  simplicity  and  poverty  (Ebionites),  with  community 
of  property,  and  preferring  celibacy  to  marriage.  This 
world  is  doomed  to  destruction,  and  the  kingdom  of  Heaven 
about  to  dawn. — Hence  the  discrepancies  between  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament.  Now  look  to  the  world  in  1893. 
The  interminable  wars  and  huge  standing  armies — exorbit- 
ant taxations,  with  plutocracy,  soldateska,  pauperisn,  dyna- 
mite and  constant  social  upheavals,  eighteen  centuries 
after  the  New  Testament  Era !  Thus  Herbert  Spencer 
pointedly  remarks  that  as  yet,  there  exists  no  really  Chris- 
tian State  in  the  world. 

Rabbinical  Penal  Code. 

We  have  spoken  of  the  leading  principles  underlying  the 
Mosaic  criminal  jurisprudence.  We  have  seen  that  spirit 
to  be  eminently  practical;  the  emanation  of  a  great  law- 
giver, truly  inspired  by  the  desire  to  found  a  strong  society, 


RABBIXrCAL    PENAL    CODE.  41 

capable  of  coping  with  the  "  evil  inclinations,"  the  bestiality 
and  selfishness  of  man.  He  felt  that  law  is  for  the  protec- 
tion of  the  innocent  victim,  not  of  the  criminal  transgressor. 
He  gave  the  accused  all  chances  of  proving  his  innocence, 
if  so ;  but  none,  or  few,  to  profit  by  the  intricate  meshes  of 
paragraphs,  chicanery  and  subterfuge.  We  read  (V.  M.  1 9, 16): 
**Bytwo  or  three  witnesses  charges  shall  be  established." 
"Thou  Shalt  examine  and  inquire  diligently."  "False 
testimony  shall  be  rigorously  punished."  "But  he  insisted 
that  wrong  shall  be  removed."  "Eye  for  eye,  and  tooth 
for  tooth — whosoever  shall  spill  blood,  his  blood  shall  be 
spilled."  "Innocent  blood  cries  to  God,  and  that  blood 
pollutes  the  land."  "The  unintentional  manslayer  was  to 
flee  to  and  hide  in  an  asylum."  The  intentional  murderer 
shall  be  seized  and  examined,  condemned  and  executed  by 
a  regularly  instituted  court,  not  by  lynch-law.  Thus  the 
leading  traits  of  the  Mosaic  penal  laws  were  dictated  by 
the  divine  spirit  of  common  sense,  and  with  the  pure  aim 
of  firmly  establishing  a  civilized  State  and  society,  screening 
innocence,  deterring  crime,  and  giving  the  citizen  as  much 
security  and  happiness  as  the  circumstances  allow.  This 
general  outline  of  civil  and  criminal  law  is  sound.  Its 
principle  lies  deep  in  liuman  nature,  and  hence  it  underlies 
the  best  of  all  penal  codes  extant.  All  build  upon  the 
principle  of :  (^)  "  Whosoever  spares  the  guilty,  punishes  the 
innocent." 

Unfortunately,  lay,  and  even  professional,  men  are  often 
liable  to  false  sympathy.  Seeing  before  them,  not  the 
murdered  victim,  but  the  person  tried  for  his  life,  they  think 
only  of  the  possible  wrong  to  him,  and  never  of  the  certain 
wrong  done  by  him.  They  pity  him,  forgetting  that  pity  for 
him  is  cruelty  to  the  victim  and  to  society  at  large.  Now, 
this  charge  of  over-sentimentalism,  which  cannot  be  laid 
at  the  door  of  the  Mosaic  legislation,  appears  to  me,  to  be 

(1)  (Jui  parcit  nocontihus,  iiiiiocfiitibiis  piiiiit. 


42  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  burden  of  the  Rabbinical  penal  code.  The  tendency 
of  the  New  Testament  to  put  love  in  place  of  right,  seems 
to  prevail  in  the  Talmud,  too.  It  appears,  the  rigid  discip- 
line of  the  Ten  Words,  the  noble  family  influence,  the  refined 
Monotheism  and  the  deeply  inculcated  prophetic  morality 
had  long  ago  educated  the  Teachers  in  Israel  to  such  a  high 
idealism,  that  they  knew  crime  but  by  hearsay,  and  legislated 
upon  it  only  theoretically,  not  to  meet  stern  facts  and  pro- 
tect society.  Several  large  treatises  discuss  the  Talmudical 
penal  laws.  But  they  all  bear  the  stamp  of  idealism,  as  if 
they  could  never  make  up  their  minds  that  'crime  is  actual 
and  must  be  restrained.  They  asked  such  proofs  of  guilt 
that,  a  hundred  to  one,  crime  remained  unpunished.  It 
would  seem  as  if  they  were  rather  afraid  of  doing  than  of 
restraining  wrong.  They  started  from  the  Mosaic  law,  but 
interposed  so  many  points  and  clauses  and  paragraphs  as  ever 
to  leave  the  case  doubtful  and  give  the  criminal  the  benefit 
of  the  doubt.  They  were  implicitly  trusting  in  miraculous, 
providential  interference  that  the  guilty  would  be  punished, 
for  heaven's  sake. 

Illustrations — Simon  ben  Shetaii. 

Here  is  an  illustration  :  In  Babil.  Sanhedrin  37a,  the 
leading  treatise  of  the  Rabbinical  penal  code,  we  read : 
"How  shall  we  overawe  the  witnesses?"  They  are  to  be 
told:  Perhaps  do  you  speak  only  by  guess,  or  by  hearsay, 
or  by  witness,  even  of  an  honest  man  ?  Remember,  we,  the 
judges,  shall  closely  examine  yon,  for  human  life  is  therein 
involved,  .  .  .  and  future  generations,  .  .  .  and 
whosoever  destroys  a  person  is  just  as  wicked  as  if  he  had 
destroyed  the  world,  .  .  .  following  up  with  a  long 
homily.  Upon  this  Mishna  comes  the  Rabbinical  discus- 
sion: The  witnesses  are  asked  :  Did  you  see  the  accused 
running  after  a  man,  into  a  ruin,  and  you  were  after  him, 
whereupon  you  saw  the  accused  with  bloody  sword  in  hand 


ILLUSTRATIONS — SIMON    BEN    SHETAH.  4J 

and  the  murdered  man  weltering  in  Ms  blood?  If  that  is 
what  you  saw,  you  have  seen  nothiui^!  .  .  .  We  have 
learned  R.  Simon  ben  Shetah  (prince  of  the  Sanhedrin) 
said  :  So  may  I  see  consolation  that  once  upon  a  time  I  saw 
one  running  after  a  man,  into  a  ruin,  and  I  run  after  him,  and 
I  saw  a  sword  in  his  hand  with  blood  trickling  down  from  it 
and  the  other  man  weltering  on  the  ground.  Whereupon  I 
exclaimed  :  ''Bad  man,  who  has  killed  this  person?  Either 
I  or  you!  But  how  can  I  help  it;  I  cannot  punish  you, 
because  the  Thorah — Law — has  declared  :  '  By  the  mouth  of 
two  witnesses  he  shall  die.'  (V.  M.  19).  '  He  who  examines 
the  thoughts  shall  punish  thee  for  this  murder ! ' "  Indeed) 
it  was  rumored  that  the  murderer  did  not  stir  from  the 
place,  "  but  expired  from  the  bite  of  a  serpent." — So  for 
Sanhedrin  37,  a  and  h. 

Now  of  that  same  Simon  ben  Shetah,  it  is  told  in  another 
place  of  the  identical  treatise,  that  he  was  a  very  energetic 
man,  fiercely  striving  to  extirjiate  fraud  and  crime,  to  such 
an  extent  that  he  had  hanged  eighty  witches  in  one  day,  and 
that  once  upon  a  time  some  aggrieved  parties  conspired 
against  him  and  accused  his  own  son  of  some  imaginary 
crime,  which  son  was  actually  condemned  and  executed, 
though  his  accusers  acknowledged,  before  the  execution? 
that  they  had  slandered  him;  the  Rabbinical  law  not 
allowing  witnesses  to  recant  what  they  had  testified  to. 
(Sanhedrin,  44  &,  Rashi  and  elsewhere.) 

The  story  is  piquant  enough  and  runs  thus  :  ''  A  ghost  had 
denounced  in  a  dream  the  Synhedrial  President,  Simon  ben 
Shetah,  for  his  tolerating  Jewish  witches  in  Askalon,  a 
neighboring  Philistine  city.  Thereupon  he  surprised  eighty 
such  witches  ;  he,  followed  by  as  manj'-  stout,  young  students, 
who,  on  entering  their  conventicle  by  stratagem,  raised  them 
from  the  ground  to  render  their  witchcraft  impotent  (^j — the 
known  popular  superstition. — They  took  them  forcibly  out 

nitt^ijr  msKorD  pN  dvj'i  ,)'-iN'n  p  jno  nnN*  c^'-x  n-ar  iDjant*  nyc-o    (i) 


44  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

and  at  once  hanged  them.  Thereupon  their  relatives 
avenged  them  ^y  accusing  of  a  deadly  crime  the  president's 
own  son,  who  was  really  executed,  though  the  witnesses,  in 
time,  confessed  their  slander."  The  legendary  character  of 
the  tale  is  palpable.  A  judge  who  abstained  from  punishing 
a  murderer  upon  the  best  circumstantial  evidence,  hanged 
eighty  women,  in  a  foreign  country,  in  one  day,  summarily, 
upon  the  strength  of  their  own  confession,  contrary  to 
Eabbinical  law,  for  witchcraft,  and  had  his  son  executed, 
thougli  his  accusers  confessed  their  mendacity !  All  of 
these  stories  aim  only  at  showing  the  eccentricities  of 
Simon  ben  Shetah,  and  say  nothing  more. 

Of  course,  both  these  stories  are  legendary,  yet  they  show 
the  spirit  and  drift  of  the  Rabbinical  statute.  Let  us  give 
here  a  cursory  outline  of  its  principles  :  Two  witnesses,  at 
least,  had  to  testify  to  the  facts  of  the  crime.  Self-incrimi- 
nation and  confession  was  not  tolerated  (^) ;  no  torture  was 
ever  used.  No  circumstantial  evidence,  even  of  a  most  certain 
nature,  was  admitted;  only  eye-witnesses,  solidly  testifying 
to  each  and  every  item  of  the  case,  had  a  hearing.  The 
least  contradiction  was  invalidating  the  testimony;  any 
doubt  was  for  the  benefit  of  the  defendant.  The  witnesses 
were  overawed  and  severely  cross-examined,  almost  intimi- 
dated. (')  They  were  questioned  about  the  major  and  the 
minor  circumstances,  the  surroundings,  the  hour,  day, 
month,  year.  Release  year  and  .Jubilee,  the  place,  tlie  cloth- 
ing, the  colors,  etc.,  of  the  case.  If  several  persons  committed 
one  murder,  he  alone  who  gave  the  death  blow  was  guilty  of 
murder;  hence  again  entangling  questions.  Above  all,  the 
witness  must  have  giten  forewarning  to  the  would-be 
aggressor,  and  this  just  before  the  act,  with  mentioning  of 
punishment,  etc,  which  delinquent  must  have  expressly 
acknowledged.     Each   of   the  witnesses   must   be   an   eye- 

.yjn  vovy  D'L"ro  mN  px  np;n   (i) 

.prD'"SQ     1 2) 


II-LUSTEATIOKS — SIMON    BEN    SIIETAH.  45 

witness  of  the  entire  crime  ;  one  part  thereof  supplemented 
by  another  \Yitness  was  not  sufficient.  The  accused  must  be 
of  a^e,  which  majority  vnvie^from  puherty  to  full  Tnanhood. 

Carefully  surveying  the  Eabbinical  penal  code,  it  would 
seem  as  if  it  had  never  been  practically  carried  out ;  and  that 
even  from  beginnint^,  it  was  but  a  speculative  study.  The 
Mislina  may  yet  represent  practical  law.  The  Gemara  is 
but  theory  and  speculation.  The  early  Mishna-doctors, 
mostly,  were  yet  judges ;  but  after  Hillel,  and  especially 
with  the  second  century  after  C,  they  were  but  students  of 
the  law.  For  then  Home  held  the  government  with  the 
administration  of  criminal  justice.  The  Sanhedrin  was 
no  longer  occupied  with  either;  it  was  but  the  high 
religious  court,  j)i*esiding  over  the  congregation  and  the  civil 
justice,  as  in  the  diaspora.  It  is  very  possible  that  under 
the  Persians,  the  Seleucidse  and  the  Ptolemeans,  the  Judseans 
had  not,  either,  their  own,  full,  criminal  jurisdiction,  and 
hence  had  but  very  little  opportunity  to  work  out  a  prac- 
tical penal  code.  They  were  pre-occupied  with  two  grand 
ideas — the  preservation  of  the  national  religion  and  with 
watching  the  opportunities  of  restoration.  Everything 
else  they  wisely  left  to  the  political  masters. 

In  the  meantime,  to  occupy  usefully  their  minds,  they 
expounded  Bible  and  Mishna,  preparing  everything  for  the 
coming  restoration.  As  to  the  penal  laAvs  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, they  seemed  to  have  thought  them  too  severe,  and 
fell  into  the  other  extreme  of  being  too  lenient.  They 
appear  to  have  aimed  at  the  abolition  of  capital  punish- 
ment, probably  also  of  all  corporeal  punishment,  reserving 
it  only  for  such  extreme  cases  where  the  lawgiver  had 
pronounced  the  curse  of  eircmo7z  {^),  or  "elimination  from 
among  the  people."  There  is  much  talk  about  the  thirty- 
nine  stripes,  yet  they  may  never  have  been  administered.  A 
very  ideal  way  of   thinking  was  that ;    unfortunately  not 

•niD   (1) 


46  .SPirUT    OF    THK    lUP.r.ICAL    LEGISLATION. 

strong  enougli  for  this  real  world,  as  it  is.  In  peaceful 
times  the  moral  sense  of  the  nation  may  have  been  suffi- 
cient; not  so  during  civil  commotions.  Hence,  the  Roman's 
complaint  about  the  "  slcariansy 

The  New  Tp:stament. 

It  is  interesting  to  remark  that  the  New  Testament 
moved  in  parallel  lines.  It  abolished  corporeal  and  cayjital 
punishments.  You  remember  Jesus  dismissing  the  adul- 
teress witli,  "  Go  and  sin  no  more,"  and  "  Whosoever  is  better 
may  throw  the  first  stone,"  etc.  It  made  even  a  trial  at 
abolishing  all  kinds  of  punishment,  pecuniary,  too,  suggest- 
ing: "Who  steals  thy  coat,  give  him  thy  mantle,  too," 
abiding  by  love,  reason  and  persuasion  for  human  improve- 
ment. There  was  a  rich  flood  of  ideality  streaming  in 
Judsea,  coming  from  the  heights  of  Sinai,  which  inspired 
her  leading  minds  witli  so  much  hopefulness  for  human 
amelioration.  Fifteen  centuries  have  since  passed  over  New 
Testament  and  Talmud,  and  those  hopes  have  not  yet  been 
fulfilled.  The  Mosaic  penal  code,  mainly,  is  yet  the  crim- 
inal law  of  nations;  the  ideals  of  apostles  and  rabbis  are 
yet  ideals.  We  are  now  in  1893,  the  epoch  of  Bismarck^ 
the  age  of  the  "  blood  and  iron"  policy,  of  dynamite,  and  of 
anti-Semitism.  How  slow  the  masses  move! 
Beware,  ye  generous  enthusiasts! — And  yet  these  very 
dreamers  and  idealogists  of  to-day,  are  the  models  and 
ideals  of  the  far-off  future.  In  the  age  of  the  hlood  and 
iron  policy  we  warm  our  hearts  and  cheer  our  souls  with 
the  hope  that  once  man  will  make  these  ideals  real,  and  we 
dream  of  the  time  when  capital  punishment  and  all  i)unish- 
ment,  will  be  abolished;  when  reason  and  sympathy  alone 
will  render  man  amenable  to  justice  and  kindness.  And 
such  dreams  are  worth  more  than  many  a  reality.  They 
are  tlie  leaven  of  progress,  the  quickening  dew  of  liuman 
advance. 


native  and  alien.  47 

Native  and  Alien. 

The  equality  before  the  biblical  law  has  no  restriction  as  to 
race,  or  creed  or  original  country.  The  Guer,  alien  in  blood, 
creed  and  origin,  if  he  but  renounced  the  grossest  forms  of 
heathenism,  the  cruel  and  licentious  worship  of  Baal, 
Astaroth,  etc.,  if  he  had  but  adopted  the  seven  Noachidic 
commandments,  which  we  would  term  the  universal  moral 
law,  wsuch  an  alien  immigrant,  called  Guer  toshahh,  was 
entitled  to  the  same  civil  rights  and  privileges  as  the 
indigenous  Judsean  of  the  creed  and  seed  of  Abraham. 
So  we  read  in  Exod.  12,  49,  and  Numb.  15,  17  and  29 : 
"  There  is  but  one  law,  and  one  right  for  native  and  for 
immigrant."  Realistic  and  sober  as  the  Mosaic  legislation 
is,  in  comparison  with  the  idealism  of  the  later  New 
Testamentary  development,  it  is  most  magnanimous  com- 
pared with  all  other  contemporaneous  codices.  Over  three 
thousand  years  ago  it  did  not  discriminate  against  aliens, 
whilst  our  to-day's  legislations  are  brimful  of  such  discrim- 
inations. Europe  has  invented  its  Pan-Latinism — Slavism — 
Germanism,  anti-Polism  and  anti-Semitiiam.  No  one  can  com- 
pete but  the  native,  if  of  the  dominant  Church.  There  are 
in  our  America  cropping  up  biases  of  the  same  nature  and  in 
the  same  direction,  lurking  among  the  vulgar,  those  having 
no  other  virtue  to  boast  of,  putting  an  embargo  upon  mind, 
protecting  one's  own  indolence  behind  the  Chinese  wall  of  a 
protective  tariff,  prohibiting  foreign-born  talent  and  science 
from  competing,  in  order  the  easier  to  barter  off  one's  own 
incapacity,  thus  expecting  civilization  to  come  from  Africa  or 
Arizona.  I  hope  every  clear-sighted  American,  every  thought- 
ful citizen  of  this  broad  land,  will  remember  that  we  or  our 
parents,  have  come  hither  in  search  of  freedom,  home  and 
bread,  coupled  with  the  best  part  of  European  civilization. 
We  did  not  come  here  to  live  in  laziness  and  sink  down  into 
Indian  barbarism.     And  that  will  be  the  result  should  we 


48  SPIRIT    OP   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

exclude  European  mind,  science  and  art  from  competing 
and  stimulating  our  rising  generations.  I  hope  this  pitiful 
addition  to  European  craze,  viz.,  "  Pan-Americanism/'  that 
new  edition  of  old  knownuthifigism,  under  the  hypocritical 
mask  of  assumed  patriotism,  in  reality  a  screen  for  ignor- 
ance, will  never  become  the  polity  of  this  great  country, 
the  hope  of  liberated  mankind. — Now  the  biblical  law 
alone  among  ancient  States,  declared  for  the  equality  of  the 
immigrant.  For  not  only  among  barbarians,  but  even  in 
refined  Greece  and  Rome,  there  was  a' vast  distinction  made 
between  native  and  stranger,  free-born  and  slave,  patron 
and  client.  Here  is  a  trait  of  truly  divine  impartiality. 
The  modern  equality  of  man  was  consecrated,  at  least  in. 
principle,  over  three  thousand  years  ago. 

Civil  Jurlspeudence. 

The  biblical  civil  jurisprudence,  too,  is  built  upon  the 
principle  of  rigid  equality.  In  pecuniary  matters,  too,  is 
'^ eye  for  eye''  the  measure.  But  whilst  that  principle 
made  criminal  punishment  severer  there  than,  in  our  modern 
sentimental  times,  it  treated  offenses  against  property  much 
milder  than  we  do.  We,  in  modern  times,  term  fraud,  theft 
and  robbery  a  penal,  criminal  offense,  and  punish  them  with 
stripes,  imprisonment,  and  even  death.  The  Mosaic  law 
does  not.  Even  in  our  America,  the  judge  does  condemn  to 
prison  and  stripes  for  theft.  In  Europe,  now,  it  is  mostly 
punished  with  imprisonment  and  fines  besides.  In  Eastern 
Europe  theft  used  to  be  punished  by  lopping  off  hands. 
In  Hungary  formerly,  they  used  to  hang  to  the  first  tree 
every  unfortunate  wretch  robbing  twenty-five  kreutzer  (eight 
cents)  on  the  public  road.  Undoubtedly  such  harsh  treatment 
is  against  equality.  How  can  we  punish  bodily  an  offense 
against  property?  The  principle  of  "  eye  for  eye  "  screens 
the  Biblical  law  from  such  barbarities.  Any  attack  upon 
property  is  there  punished  with  loss   of  property  and  no 


THEFT,  FRAUD,  ETC.  49 

more ;  this  is  democracy ;  the  other  is  plutocracy.  Thus  in  the 
later  nou-biblical  legislations,  the  noble  and  the  rich  were 
fined  with  money  for  offenses  against  limb  and  life  of  the 
poor ;  the  poor  with  life  and  limb  for  offenses  against  the  rich 
man's  property.  The  Bible  says  :  "  Limb  for  limb,  life  for 
life,  and  dollar  for  dollar."  This  is  democracy,  this  is  divine 
equality.  The  limit  of  civil  jurisprudence  in  Mosaism  i& 
somewhat  more  largely  drawn  than  in  modern  law.  All  mat- 
ters not  involving  life  or  limb  are  civil.  JS'on-payment  of 
debts,  fraud,  theft,  robbery,  embezzlement,  etc.,  fall  under  this 
heading.  The  offender  must  pay,  even  with  an  additional 
fine.  If  he  has  not,  the  court  can  hire  him  out  for  six  years 
labor,  but  never  inflict  imprisonment  or  stripes  or  death. 
Generally  no  two  punishments  for  a  crime  are  inflicted  at  the 
same  time. 

Theft,  Fraud,  etc. 

So  we  read  (Exod.  21,  36) :  "  When  a  man  will  steal  an  ox 
or  a  sheep,  and  kill  or  sell  them,  he  shall  restitute  five  oxen 
or  four  sheep  instead."  The  ox,  the  chief  wealth  of  the 
Judsean  farmer,  the  bread-giver,  in  primitive  times,  an  object 
of  worship  (the  Egyptian  Apis,  the  ^^  golden  calf"  of  Israel), 
must  be  protected  by  all  means — hence,  it  must  be  resti- 
tuted five-fold  instead.  The  sheep,  comparatively  less 
important,  yielding  milk  to  the  family,  was  restituted  four- 
fold. When  yet  found  alive  with  the  thief,  and  hence 
suggesting  a  possible  restitution,  the  indemnification  was 
but  double.  (Baba  Kama.  VII),  (Mainonides  Jad.,  see  Trea- 
tise on  Theft,  I,  4).  On  returning  the  stolen  object  before  sued 
for  it,  no  fine  was  imposed.  Any  other  movable  property 
stolen,  incurred  double  restitution.  Defrauding  the  sanctuary 
entailed  one-fifth  part  in  addition,  as  punishment.  (Levit. 
5,  16). — The  same  one -fifth  was  for  civil  fraud  and  over- 
reaching (Idem  5,  24) ;  he  must  pay  or  be  sold  unto  six  years' 
servitude.     According  to  Rabhinical  tradition,  the  selling 


50  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

of  a  man  for  six  years  was  only  for  the  original  value  of 
the  robbery.  If  he  could  not  pay  the  fine,  he  was  not  sold, 
but  remained  indebted  for  it  until  he  could. 

The  Eabbis  found  in  the  Pentateuch  365  prohibitory  laws 
and  248  affirmative  ones.  The  transgression  of  the  former 
entailed,  besides  the  money  involved,  if  so,  flagellation,  too, 
or  thirty-nine  stripes ;  but  this  was  hedged  in  with  such  legal 
requirements,  as  forewarning  by  two  exact  witnesses  immedi- 
ately before  the  commission  of  the  act,  with  their  naming  of 
the  crime  and  its  punishment,  ttc,  the  acknowledgment,  yea, 
acquiescence  in,  or  affronting  the  law  by  the  offender;  then 
again,  rigid  examination  of  the  witnesses,  etc.;  that  the  claim, 
in  theory,  of  flagellation,  besides  the  money  punishment,  is 
pretty  nearly  illusory,  and  next  to  impossible.  Hence,  it 
appears  that  the  general  rule  of  the  Rabbinical  court  was 
to  punish  for  each  offense,  but  with  one  kind  of  chastise- 
ment, viz:  the  severer  of  the  two;  though  the  Pentateuch 
mentions  occasionally  a  money  fine  and  stripes  in  the  case 
of  a  man  slandering  his  own  bride. 

Burglary. 

We  have  seen  that  thieving  never  incurred  imprisonment 
nor  death.  Yet  the  text  says  (Exod.  22.  1):  "When  the 
thief  is  surprised  in  house-breaking,  in  the  dark  of  niglit, 
and — fighting  ensuing — he  is  killed,  that  killing  is  not  con- 
sidered a  criminal  act.  But  if  the  stealing  takes  place  in 
broad  daylight,  killing  the  thief  is  manslaughter."  This  is 
the  plain  sense  of  the  verse.  Breaking  in  during  the  night 
constitutes  danger  of  life  for  the  people  of  the  house,  and 
killing  the  thief  is  but  self-defense;  whilst  in  broad  day- 
light the  thief  shall  be  held  to  pay,  but  not  killed.  So 
expounded  Bhen,  Ezra  and  Raslibam.  Whilst  tradition 
expounds :  "Any  house-breaking  renders  the  killing  of  the 
thief  legitimate  defense,  except  when  it  is  clear  as  day- 
light that  he  never  intended  murder  (?).  (Sanhedrin,  72,  a,) 
and  (Mainonides  on  Theft,  IX,  7.) 


status  of  the  stranger.  51 

New  Testament  on  Theft. 

No  doubt  the  New  Testament  teaching :  "  Whosoever  steals 
thy  coat,  give  him  thy  mantle,  too,"  is  more  ideal,  and  if 
followed  up,  would  create  a  righteous  society,  needing  no 
laws,  judges,  police,  prisons  and  armies.  Unfortunately,  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  not  yet  come,  and  the  State  needs  yet 
repressive  laws  to  maintain  society ;  lience^  right  and  force. 

It  is,  as  said  above,  both  odious  and  sheer  folly  to  make 
any  such  comparisons.  Moses  claims  to  be  a  lawgiver. 
Jesus  assumed  the  role  of  a  divine  Messiah.  One  legislates 
for  this  earth  ;  the  other  for  heaven.  One  for  the  State ;  the 
other  for  the  Church.  The  one  for  the  immediate  present ; 
the  other  for  an  ideal  future.  Their  aims  differ;  hence  so 
their  views. 

Status  of  the  Stranger. 

A  solid  test  of  the  calibre  of  a  statute-book,  to  know 
whether  a  lawgiver  is  animated  by  narrow  zeal  for  his  own 
clan  and  class,  or  by  large-hearted  humanity,  aiming  at  the 
ultimate  benefit  of  all  classes  and  all  fractions  of  the 
people,  such  a  test  is :  what  he  legislates  concerning  the 
poor,  the  orphan,  the  widow,  and  more  than  that,  concern- 
ing the  stranger — he  the  most  unbefriended,  unprotected, 
helpless  alien,  for  whom  nobody  cares,  nobody  has  a  feel- 
ing, a  word — nobody,  except  the  great  heart  of  a  true 
legislator,  a  philanthropic  sage.  Indeed,  the  test  of  a 
sound  statute-book  is  not  sympathy  with  the  strong,  the 
crafty,  the  bold,  the  criminal,  but  rather  with  the  victims 
thereof.  This  test  applied  to  Mosaism,  that  proves  to  be 
supremely  humane  and  sympathetic.  So  it  is  with  the 
weaker  portion  of  humankind  in  general,  and  especially 
with  the  alien.  Wherever  we  look  among  ancient  legisla- 
tions, we  find  but  harshness  for  him.  He  was  pretty  much 
out  of  the  pale  of  justice — a  piece  of  public  property.  A 
stranger  was  synonymous  with  an  enemy.    In  Roman  times 


52  SPIRIT    OF    THE   BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

lie  had  to  accept  some  citizen  as  his  patron.  During  the 
Middle  Ages  his  property  was  confiscated  on  any  pre- 
tense, especially  when  he  died.  When  shipwrecked,  he 
was  pillaged  and  enslaved.  Crimes  against  him  were  con- 
nived at.  Crimes  by  him  were  punished  with  exceptional 
cruelty.  So  it  was  everywhere.  In  Germany,  during  the 
Middle  Ages,  the  Jews  were  so  treated.  So  they  were  in 
England,  France  and  Spain  until  their  expulsion.  In  Russia 
and  Roumania  this  is  as  yet  the  case — in  1893.  In  holy 
Russia  the  Poles,  the  Germans,  the  Tartars,  etc.,  though 
inhabitants  of  the  country  long  before  the  JNIoscovite 
dominion,  are  treated  as  such  aliens  and  cruelly  discrimi- 
nated against.  Just  now  liberal.  Western  Europe  is  pretty 
exclusive  concerning  new  immigrants.  When  poor,  they 
are  simply  not  allowed  to  stay.  Even  when  talented  or 
wealthy  and  allowed  to  naturalize,  they  are  never  perfectly 
put  on  equality  with  the  natives.  A  piece  of  the  alien's 
chain,  as  the  string  at  the  foot  of  the  bird  breaking  from 
its  cage,  is  ever  dragging  after  him.  He  is  a  native  in 
regard  to  duties ;  he  is  a  stranger  as  to  rights. 

One  God,  One  Law. 

Mosaism,  with  its  one  God-idea  as  the  corner-stone  of  the 
State,  is  inexorable  concerning  idolatrous  worship,  with  its 
obscene,  cruel  and  revolting  rites.  Save  that  exclusion,  it 
is  impartially  just  and  merciful  to  the  stranger.  Nay,  some- 
times it  seems  as  if  the  lawgiver  is  especially  solicitous 
concerning  him.  We  find  in  Sacred  Scripture  hundreds  of 
passages  to  that  point.  Nay,  one  of  the  attributes  of  the 
Deity  is :  "  He  loves  the  stranger,  the  widow  and  the 
orphan ; "  which  occurs  time  and  again  on  the  pages  of  the 
entire  Bible.  It  very  seldom  occurred  to  Homer  or  Hesiodor 
Virgil,  that  that  might  be  a  befitting  attribute  of  the  Deity. 
W^e  do  find  it  as  a  compliment  to  the  gods  of  certain  descrip- 
tions.    The  gods  there  in  reality  and  fact  side  with  the 


PLIMSOL,    E.    P. 


53 


stronger  and  the  victors.  Success  was  there  the  only  criterion 
of  merit  and  virtue.  So  much  so,  that  even  the  etymologi- 
cal origin  and  meaning  of  virtue,  denotes  force,  bravery, 
success,  not  moral  goodness,  righteousness  or  wisdom ;  virtue 
actually  meaning  manly  strength. 

Protectiox  to  Strangers,  Widows  and  Orphans. 

Let  us  look  at  a  few  Biblical  passages  concerning  the 
stranger  and  its  status.  (Exod.  22,  20) :  "  The  stranger  thou 
shalt  not  overreach  nor  oppress,  for  strangers  ye  were  in 
Egypt.  Nor  shall  ye  wrong  the  widow,  nor  the  orphan,  for 
if  ye  do  wrong  him,  and  he  cries  unto  me,  I  shall  indeed 
listen  to  the  cry.  And  my  ire  will  enkindle  and  I  shall  kill 
ye  by  the  sword  (of  war),  and  your  wives  shall  be  widows, 
and  your  children  orphans !"  Reader,  please  search  through- 
out the  entire  GrsBCO-Roman  fine  literature,  with  all  its 
piety,  prayers  and  sacrifices,  litanies  and  eulogies,  and  see 
whether  you  find  a  passage  of  such  a  ring,  so  thrilling,  so 
worthy  the  Deity,  so  effective  to  enforce  right  living  and 
justice. 

Plimsol,  M.  p. 

Some  years  ago  the  following  interesting  piece  of  news 
run  through  the  papers :  In  the  British  Parliament  a  hot 
discussion  arose  concerning  the  discovery  that  certain 
English  merchant  princes  had  sent  out  to  sea  unsafe 
vessels  with  huge  stocks  of  merchandise,  well  insured, 
viz  :  the  vessels  and  the  goods  were  insured,  the  sailors  not. 
Of  course  the  vessels  were  wrecked,  the  princely  merchants 
got  their  insurance  and  chuckled;  the  sailors,  drowned, 
became  the  prey  of  the  fishes,  and  their  poor  widows  and 
orphans  cried  in  vain  and  were  thrown  ui3on  the  poor-rates 
and  the  work-houses.  One,  very  plain  speaking  Mr.  Plimsol, 
M.  P.,  an  honest  old-fashioned  Puritan,  quoted,  in  the  face 
of  the  murderers  :  "Ye  shall  not  wrong  the  widows  and  the 


54  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

orphans,  for  tliey  will  cry  unto  me,  and  I  shall  kill  you  by 
the  sword,  and  your  wives  shall  be  widows,  and  your  chil- 
dren orphans !  "  That  was  very  unparliamentary,  but  it  was 
telling ;  the  merchant  princes  found  it  shocking. — (Exod. 
23,9):  "The  stranger  thou  shalt  not  press,  for  ye  know 
how  he  feels  at  heart.  Ye  were  strangers  in  Egypt. — The 
crops  of  six  years  are  thine,  but  that  of  the  seventh,  leave 
to  the  poor.  For  six  days  thou  shalt  work,  but  on  the  seventh, 
rest ;  that  on  it  may  rest,  too,  thy  beast,  thy  slave  and  the 
stranger."  (Levit.  19,  33) — "The  stranger  in  thy  land  thou 
shalt  not  over-reach  ;  treat  him  as  a  native,  love  him  as  thy- 
self, for  strangers  ye  were  in  Egypt." 

(Levit.  24,  20-22):  "Eye  for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth.  The 
murderer  shall  die.     One  right  for  stranger  and  native." 

(Deut.  1,  16-17):  "Render  fair  justice  between  a  man, 
his  neighbor  and  his  stranger.  Do  not  discriminate  between 
humble  and  big  people." — (Deut.  10,  17-19):  "For  Jahveh, 
your  God,  is  above  all  the  gods,  omnipotent  and  awe-inspir- 
ing, accepting  no  bribes,  nor  favoring  any  person;  who 
renders  justice  to  the  orphan,  the  widow,  and  loves  the 
stranger  to  give  him  bread  and  raiment.  Love  the 
stranger,  for  strangers  ye  were  in  Egypt." 

Creed  and  Deed. 

Mark  here  how  the  broad  theology  of  Moses  yields  a 
broad  morality;  how  religion  is  humanitarian;  a  universal 
God,  a  universal  mankind,  a  universal  right ;  the  father- 
hood of  God,  the  brotherhood  of  man ;  including  all  races, 
sects,  countries,  tongues,  sexes,  stations,  classes  and  masses. 
Look  here  how  right  creed  yields  right  deed,  as  root  and 
fruit,  as  principle  and  life. 

Homer  and  Hesiod,  Virgil  and  Ovid,  teach  scores  and 
hundreds  of  gods,  that  means  as  many  colliding  forces, 
interests,  creations,  human  races  and  dynasties  of  divine 
origin,  feuds   and   wars   fomented   by  the  gods  and  their 


HOSPITALITY    AND    rROTECTION.  55 

descendants,   the   earthly  rulers.     Polytheism    in    heaven 
means  war  on  earth. 

Remember  those  grand  tragic  poems,  Homer's  "Iliad" 
and  "Odyssey,"  the  siege  and  destruction  of  Troy  by 
combined  Greece,  originated  in  the  jealousy  and  the  quar- 
rels of  the  gods  and  goddesses.  So  is  Virgil's  "iEneid." 
See  how  a  contemptible  theology  produces  an  execrable 
morality  and  becomes  the  source  of  a  wretched  society- 
The  Monotheism  of  the  Bible  community  is,  therefore, 
justly  accounted  as  its  corner-stone.  It  is  so  of  its  entire 
legislation.  It  is  the  base  of  the  doctrine,  "  One  duty  and 
one  right  for  all ;  "  and  hence  the  status  about  the  stranger, 
who  is  fully  protected  by  the  law,  because  he  is  included 
in  large-hearted  humanity — offspring  of  the  one  Deity. 

Hospitality  and  Protection. 

Let  us  contemplate  a  few  more  verses  of  that  nature. 
They  are  fully  worthy  of  our  consideration.  Verses  over 
three  thousand  years  old,  standing  upon  the  large  base  of 
broad,  universal  right  and  justice,  without  asking  the 
^^ shibholetJi^^  of  race,  sect  or  origin,  treating  native  and 
alien  alike.  Such  verses,  indeed,  are  refreshing  in  our  age, 
our  Bismarckian  age  of  blood  and  iron,  in  1893,  in  our 
boastful  Western  civilization,  brimful  with  pan-Germanism, 
Latinism  and  Slavism,  and  permeated  with  so  many  bitter 
antagonisms  under  the  pretext  of  race  and  church.  Let  us 
look  to  a  few  verses  more,  breathing  the  divine  spirit  of 
one  large-hearted  humankind. 

(V.  M.,  23,  16):  "Thou  slialt  not  deliver  a  slave  running 
away  from  his  master;  let  him  dwell  with  thee  wherever 
he  pleases ;  do  not  bring  him  to  grief."  What  a  noble 
"  verse  !  How  far-reaching !  A  stranger,  a  slave,  a  f ugitive? 
the  most  forlorn  subject  under  the  sun;  yet  is  he  a  human 
being,  yet  born  in  the  image  of  God,  yet  a  fellow  being. 
Over  three  thousand  years  ago  Mosaism  granted  him  the  right 


56  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATIOX. 

of  hospitality.  In  ancient  times  every  citizen  was  at  the 
despot's  mercy.  The  proudest  dignitary  of  to-day  could 
to-morrow  become  a  fugitive.  The  Bible  granted  him  hos- 
pitality. Russia  wants  the  United  States  to  deny  an  asylum 
to  her  victims !  Three  thousand  years  ago  the  State  rested 
upon  the  principle  of  force.  The  poor,  runaway  slave  was 
the  weakest  of  the  weak,  hence  no  one  took  his  part ;  his  fate 
was  as  in  the  story  of  Androclus,  the  fugitive  slave  of  a  Roman 
proconsul  in  Africa,  to  be  thrown  in  the  amphitheatre  to 
the  wild  beasts.  Androclus'  lion  was  yet  more  merciful 
than  his  master.  The  Old  Testament  alone  advocated  his 
cause  and  took  him  under  its  divine  aegis  :  "  Do  not  deliver 
poor  Androclus  to  his  master,  nor  to  the  beasts  in  the  arena." 
And  the  New  Testament,  too,  came  to  its  rescue,  and  lovingly 
admitted  him  to  the  "  kingdom  of  heaven." 

Protection  and  Bread,  too. 

But  whereupon  shall  poor  Androclus  live?  Listen! 
(Deut.  24,  10,  etc.):  *' When  thy  neighbor  owes  thee  a  debt, 
do  not  penetrate  into  his  house  to  pawn  him ;  remain  out- 
side and  he  will  hand  thee  the  pawn ;  yet  towards  sunset 
return  it  to  him,  for  he  sleeps  on  it,  and  God  will  bless  thee 
for  thy  charity."  "  Thou  shalt  not  withhold  the  wages  from 
the  poor  laborer,  be  he  a  brother  Israelite  or  a  stranger  Gentile. 
On  the  very  same  day  pay  him  his  wages  before  sunset,  for 
he  is  poor  and  is  waiting  for  the  hire ;  he  might  cry  to  God 
and  that  will  render  thee  sinful." — "  Do  not  turn  the  scales  of 
justice  against  the  stranger,  the  orphan,"  etc.  "Remember 
thou  wast  a  stranger  in  Egypt  and  God  has  redeemed  thee." 
"  When  thou  reapest  thy  grain  harvest,  thy  oil,  thy  wine, 
leave  a  small  portion  to  the  stranger,  the  oriphan,  the  widow, 
for  a  stranger  and  poor  thou  wast  in  Egypt,  therefore  do  I 
recommend  thee  to  act  in  that  way." 

Here  we  see  the  lawgiver  does  not  only  allow  the  poor 
stranger  an  asylum,  not  simply  air,  light  and  water.     No ; 


THE    lawgiver's    HEART.  57 

he  provides  for  liim  an  humble  source  of  subsistence;  he 
puts  him  on  the  same  footing  with  the  native  poor.  More,  he 
allows  him  to  work,  to  earn  wages,  and  be  punctually  paid, 
not  over-reached,  nor  harshly  treated  if  resorting  to  the 
pawnbroker ;  he  allows  him  the  right  to  glean  and  partici- 
pate in  the  blessings  of  the  wealthy  citizen;  he  is  no  pauper, 
no  drone,  no  outlaw ;  he  gets  the  chance  to  work  up,  thrive 
and  become  an  independent  citizen. 

The  Lawgiver's  Heart. 

Read  and  ponder  over  those  passages.  Don't  you  dis- 
tinctly hear  the  heart  of  the  lawgiver  beating  with  sym- 
pathy ;  don't  you  see  his  frame  quivering  with  compassion, 
writing  down  :  "Allow  a  poor  fellow-man  to  live  with  thee  ; 
a  crust  of  bread,  a  kind  word  will  make  him  happy,  and 
earn  for  thee  the  blessing  of  thy  soul,  if  thou  hast  one." 

Eead  these  verses  over.  They  will  bring  you  tears  of 
fellow-feeling  into  your  eyes,  and  thrill  you  through  and 
through.  Those  verses  toach  deeper  a  feeling  heart  than 
all  the  laments  of  Here  and  Aphrodite,  of  Paris  and  Helena, 
of  Achilles  and  Patroklus,  with  all  the  heroes  of  Homer 
and  Virgil  inclusive ;  because  they  are  honest  and  sincere. 
They  are  taken  from  the  eternal  quarry  of  stern  reality. 
They  are  pages  from  the  tragedy  of  human,  daily,  woeful 
history,  rehearsed  since  the  days  of  Abraham  and  Nimrod  (0 
until  our  own.  They  are  of  hoary  age  and  still  fresh  and 
acute  as  of  yesterday.  Look  to  suffering  humanity  and  you 
find  it  mirrored  in  those  verses. 

The  ^Mosaic  lawgiver  is  no  communist.  He  well  distin- 
guishes between  mine  and  thine.  Yet  he  commands  part 
of  the  crops  to  go  to  the  poor  and  the  strangers. 

So  Cardinal  Manning,  mentioned  above,  correctly  stated ; 
" '  Thou  shalt  commit  no  theft,'  never  applies  to  him  who 
steals  a  loaf  of  bread  for  his  children."     Practically,  he  well 

(1)  Midrash  legend. 


58  SPIRIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

understood  the  great  heart  of  the  Mosaic  legislator.  A 
hungry  man  is  no  tliief  for  a  loaf  of  bread.  A  poor  man  is 
entitled  to  his  "gleanings,"  be  he  native  or  stranger,  granted 
him  three  thousand  years  ago  by  the  Ebrew  law.  Of  course, 
in  theory  the  Cardinal  may  not  be  infallible.  In  theory  is 
stealing  always  wrong,  but  the  sympathetic,  noble  prelate, 
on  making  that  statement,  was  biased  by  his  humane 
heart.  So  was  the  Arabo-Ebraic  lawgiver,  in  pleading 
the  cause  of  the  run-away  slave,  in  securing  for  him  the 
right  of  asylum,  and  saving  out  a  pittance  for  his  subsist- 
ence. Not  because  Moses  was  a  communist,  but  because 
he  could  not  help  siding  with  Androclus  against  the  cruel 
proconsul,  his  master;  he  felt  with  the  eternal  victims  of 
social  wrong.     Truly,  great  men  have  great  hearts. 

Usury,  Interest  and  Profit. 

We  read  in  Deut.  23,  20 :  "  Thou  shalt  take  no  interest 
of  thy  brother  on  money  or  eatables  or  anything  else.  Of 
the  foreigner  thou  canst  take  interest;  of  thy  brother,  not. 
That  God  may  bless  thee  in  all  thy  doings."  This  was 
claimed  to  be  a  strong  instance  of  foreigner-hatred  and 
national  exclusiveness.  But  that  charge  is  erroneous.  It 
originated  in  misunderstanding,  in  plain  ignorance.  The 
word  Nocltri  was  mistaken  as  identical  with  Ouer,  alien, 
which  is  not  the  case.  No  doubt  both  mean  the  non- 
Ebrew,  but  with  the  vast  difference  that  Nochri  means  a 
stranger  residing  in  his  own,  non-Judasan  country;  Guer 
means  a  foreigner  emigrated  into,  domiciled  and  natural- 
ized in  Judsea.  A  Gentile  immigrant  making  Judsea  his 
home,  submitting  to  its  public  laws  and  assuming  all  its 
civic  duties,  was  entitled  to  all  its  civic  rights.  Him  the 
law  recommended  to  the  especial  protection  of  the  State ; 
whilst  a  stranger  hailing  from  a  foreign  land  and  traveling 
temporarily  in  Judaea  on  some  business,  was  entitled  to 
international  rights,  but  not  to  the  privileges  of  a  citizen. 


THE   STRANGER    IN    GREECE.  59* 

And  sncli  was  the  extra  privilefj^e  of  getting  money  and 
goods  without  interest  and  profit.  A  Gentile  naturalized 
among  the  Ebrews  was  entitled  to  that  privilege.  So  we 
read  (Levit.  25,  35):  "If  thy  brother  should  impoverish 
and  decay,  give  him  encouragement.  Immigrant  {Ouer)  or 
inhabitant,  let  him  live  with  thee.  Take  no  interest  on 
money,  or  profit  or  eatables,  of  him.  Be  afraid  of  God ; 
let  thy  brother,  native  or  alien,  live  with  thee.  I  am  thy 
God  who  brought  thee  out  of  Egypt,"  etc.  Here  we  see  the 
non-Jew  domiciliated  in  Judsea,  who,  hence,  is  a  Guer,  but 
not  a  Nochri;  he  is  fully  entitled  to  the  privilege  of  a 
loan  without  interest.  We  shall  have  in  the  sequel  of 
these  pages  more  occasion  for  seeing  why  the  lawgiver 
allowed  profit  and  interest  when  trading  with  foreign  coun- 
tries and  deprecated  it  at  home.  This  was  not  from  racial 
or  sectarian  prejudices,  but  from  economical  reasons.  He 
would  not  have  any  commerce  and  speculation  at  home  ;  he 
discouraged  home  traffic,  but  allowed  international  com- 
merce. Hence,  all  business  profit  at  home  was  interdicted, 
and  any  loan  was  to  be  given  purely  as  a  neighborly 
assistance.  We  shall  later  dilate  on  that  Mosaic  State 
policy. 

The  Stranger  in  Greece. 

For  any  person  or  anything  not  Greek  or  not  Roman,  both 
these  nations  had  a  classic  expression—"  harbaros  !  "  Bar- 
barians they  called  the  Persians,  the  Ebrews,  the  Egyptians, 
the  Gauls,  the  Germans,  the  Skythians ;  indeed,  the  entire 
world,  except  themselves.  Their  slaves  were,  of  course, 
"  barbaros.'''  Any  other  country  than  theirs  was  "  barbaros 
gy."  War  with  them  was  natural  and  always  in  order — 
'■'■  polemos  barbarosP  Intermarriage  with  them  was  a 
stain  and  a  reproach — '^lechos  barbaros.'^  The  foreigner 
was  deemed  half  a  savage,  rude  and  uncultured.  They 
owed   him   no   consideration;  he  was  out  of  the  pale  of 


60  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

justice.  To  make  war  upon  liiin,  subjugate  and  enslave 
hini,  rob  and  destroy  him,  if  too  numerous  and  dangerous, 
was  natural  right,  not  in  the  least  immoral,  and  perfectly 
compatible  with  the  highest  virtue,  even  in  our  sense  of 
the  term.  Cato  had  it  for  his  current  expression — Carthago 
delenda  est  (Carthage  must  be  destroyed),  because  she  was 
barbarian  and  in  the  way  of  Rome.  The  Scipios,  carrying 
out  Cato's  word,  are  famed  as  the  most  ideal  heroes  and 
demi-gods.  Nothing  harmed  Antonius  so  much,  as  the  fact 
that  he  was  the  husband  of  a  barbarian — Cleopatra,  the 
Queen  of  Egypt,  a  Ptolemean  princess,  but  a  barbarian 
anyhow.  jNIay  be  that  great  Csesar,  too,  suffered  at  the 
hands  of  Brutus  and  Cassius  for  the  same  crime.  To  be  a 
foreigner  was  unpardonable  in  Greece  and  Rome,  the  pat- 
terns of  ancient  civilization.  (See  Arist.  Polit.  I,  8;  and 
Plato  Republ.  373  and  469.) 

The  Stranger  in  the  Bible. 

Nothing  of  the  kind  was  in  the  Bible  (V.  M.,  10,  17): 
"Jahveh,  your  God,  is  the  master  of  all  masters,  the  Supreme 
Power  who  favors  no  persons  (classes  and  castes)  and  takes 
no  bribes  (sacrifices),  who  pleads  the  cause  of  the  widow  and 
the  orphan,  who  loves  the  foreigner  and  gives  him  bread 
and  raiment.  Love  ye  the  stranger,  for  such  ye  were  in 
Egypt." 

Here  is  quite  another  ideal  of  Deity,  and  hence  another  idea 
of  right  and  justice;  here  is  the  foreigner  not  an  outcast  and 
a  fit  victim,  but  a  brother,  as  the  native,  hence  under  the 
same  law  and  protection  as  he. 

Curious  it  is  that  sometimes  we  find  among  the  Greeks, 
too,  the  idea  of  pity  and  benevolence  as  due  to  the  stranger 
the  poor  and  the  unhappy  one.  The  ancient  poets  had  some 
such  ideal  of  the  gods,  at  least  of  Zeus,  the  supreme  Dios. 


the  stranger  in  homer.  61 

The  Stranger  in  Homer. 

But  it  was  rare  and  sporadic  and  it  never  became  a  prac- 
tical rule  of  conduct  for  man.  So  we  read  in  Homer's 
Odyssey,  VI,  207,  (^)  where  the  poet  pleads  for  his  hero, 
Odysseus,  to  be  taken  care  of,  "  because  all  foreigners  and 
beggars  are  under  the  protection  of  Zeus;"  and  further, 
there,  VII,  165  :  ('-') ''  Let  us  spend  to  Zeus,  who  accompanies 
(and  safeguards)  the  respectable  strangers,  invoking  his 
assistance."  But  that  is  a  mere  poetical  phrase.  This 
exalted  view  is  empty  poetry.  The  Greek  gods  were  usually 
modeled  after  the  Greek  princes  and  heroes.  Justice  and 
benevolence  were  not  their  leading  traits.  Agamemnon 
and  Achilles,  etc.,  undertook  to  punisli  Troy  in  order  to 
avenge  a  kidnapped  woman,  the  Spartan  Helena,  or,  at 
least,  her  husband,  Menelaus;  but  they  for  long  years 
quarrel  and  neglect  the  war;  they  quarrel  over  what?  Over 
their  own  captive  women,  whom  they  distribute  as  concu- 
bines. These  captive  women  are  treated  with  inhumanity 
snd  shamelessness.  At  the  end  of  the  ]ong  wa.r  Androm- 
ache and  Cassandra  fall  into  their  hands — about  the  only 
two  persons  having  the  reader's  full  sympathy — and  they  are 
treated  with  the  utmost  indignity  by  the  Greeks,  their 
cruel  captors;  far  worse  than  ever  was  Helena  by  Paris. 
All  the  gods  and  Zeus  himself  take  a  hand  in  the  war  with- 
out compunction.  To  neither  h.ero  or  god  does  it  occur  to 
"  plead  the  cause  of  widow,  orphan  or  stranger."  We  need 
not  search  long  for  proofs  that  th.e  Greeks  did  not  practically 
think  strangers  under  the  especial  or  any  protection  of  the 
gods.  The  most  bitter  hatred  and  contempt  for  them  was 
the  rule,  and  but  as  an  exception  they  made  show  of  gen- 
erosity. In  the  very  next  chapter  after  the  above  passages, 
(Odyssey,  VII,  30,)  Athene  accompanies  the  hero  to  the 
Faieken  and  recommends  him  "  to  follow  her  quickly  and 

(1).   ~^v  v'fv  Xpi/  Koiitttv  ~pu(;  ')u()  A/iif  t'latv  airavTH^  ielvoi  re  -ruj^ni  re. 

(2).   ,,  .     .     .   Ira  Kdl  All  T£p~iKfpahr(.i  (j~Fico/ni\  oa^'  iKtrijaiv  ci^u'  aU^oioiaiv  67r;/de<.." 


62  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAl,    LEGISLATION. 

silently,  and  not  to  look  at,  nor  speak  to  any  passer-by, 
taking  even  the  precaution  of  enveloping  Mm  in  a  thick 
cloud,  so  as  to  make  liim  invisible  to  the  natives,  adding, 
*  for  the  people  here  do  not  much  tolerate  strangers,  nor  do 
they  offer  them  hospitality.'  "  (^) 

And  yet  that  people  are  described  as  rather  good  natured 
and  humane !  The  fact  is,  that  throughout  entire  antiquity 
the  stranger  was  an  alien,  not  a  guest;  the  alien  was  an 
enemy,  and  the  enemy  a  brute,  having  no  rights  whatever. 
The  Bible  alone  declared  liim  a  human  being — a  brother. 
Of  course  Odysseus  followed  up  the  advice  of  Athene,  and 
makes  his  way  without  any  accident,  f)  Nevertheless,  it 
strikingly  shows  the  prevailing  sentiment  of  the  times.  It 
needed  an  extra  effort  on  the  part  of  the  great  deity  to 
screen  the  favorite  hero  from  violence.  Without  a  miracle, 
strangers  among  the  Greeks,  etc.,  were  treated  as  enemies. 
And  as  to  the  claim  of  Zeus  to  be  the  protector  of  the  alien, 
that  was  mere  poetry.  The  Bible  posits  the  doctrine,  and 
many  passages  there  prove  that  the  doctrine  condensed  into 
fact  but  slowly. 

Jahveh  and  Zeus. 

Nor  were  the  conceptions  of  the  classic  peoples  about 
Jupiter  himself  very  subliine.  All  the  gods,  without  excep- 
tion, were  thought  to  be  hungry  and  thirsty,  and  dependent 
upon  the  gifts  of  mortals.  Hence,  the  above-mentioned 
biblical  statement  that  "Jahveh  does  not  favor  persons,  nor 
does  he  take  bribes,"  viz.,  by  accepting  gifts  or  sacrifices  for 
favors  to  bestow.  For  as  to  the  heathen  gods,  they  did 
discriminate  against  some,  and  show  favors  to  others,  and 
all  for  bribes  and   sacrifices,   for  "hecatorribsJ^      Jupiter, 

(1).  fiTjM  Tiif  av^pojTTUv  —poTioaaso  jirjd'  kpieive.  oh  yap  ^t:ivovr  oldi;  ju'i'k'  av& ponrox)^ 
avkxovrai,  ohd'  ayaTvai^ofievoi  ouMova'  Oi'  k'  d?i?iod- ev  fA-Q)]. 

(2).  Tov  6'  apa  ^air/ue^  vavciKAvTol  ovk  kvdrjaav  hpxifisvov  Kara  aarv  dia  ai.)ia(;-  ov  yap 
' Adr/vT]  ela  ehirXoKa/io^,  Seivt/  i^eof,  y  pa  oi  ax^vv  ■&EaKealriv  Karex^ve  (jiXa  upoveova' 
hi  ■&v/iGK—{Odjss.  VII,  39.) 


JAHVEH   AND   ZEUS.  63 

indeed,  was  specially  called  Dios,  God,  and  surrounded  by 
much  pomp  and  circumstance.  At  his  nodding  the  Olym- 
pos  and  the  Heavens,  the  earth  and  the  ocean  shook.  But 
withal  he  was  depicted,  but  as  a  Roi-faineant,  with  not 
too  much  will-power,  nor  too  much  brain.  He  was  con- 
stantly led  and  misled  by  Juno  or  Venus  or  Athene,  etc. 
What  a  doubtful  role  he  played  at  the  siege  of  Troy,  or  later, 
in  Odysseus'  wanderings!  He  was  for  the  Greeks  and 
against  them,  for  and  against  the  latter,  ever  trimming, 
according  to  the  stratagems  of  Athene,  Here,  Aphrodite,  or 
Porseidon;  not  seldom  quarreling  with  his  illustrious 
sister  and  wife,  Saturnia,  after  having  dethroned  and 
exiled  his  father;  offering  occasionally  his  dear  spouse 
something  like  blows,  and  throwing  his  son,  Hefaistos- 
Vulcan,  headlong  to  the  earth,  for  having  taken  sides  with 
his  mother,  and  laming  him  for  ever,  etc.,  etc.  Now  it  is 
true  that  Socrates,  Plato  and  Aristotle  had  a  nobler  concep- 
tion of  the  Deity.  But  their  idea  was  not  the  people's  idea. 
They  were  more  or  less  considered  as  atheists.  Nor  was  it 
they  who  framed  the  State  laws;  it  was  the  vulgar  and 
their  leaders  who  did,  as  at  all  times.  Fifteen  centuries 
later  Virgil  did  not  describe  Jupiter  under  more  sublime 
colors.  iEneas  steering  for  Italy,  is  the  play-ball  of  blind 
fate  and  of  jealousy.  The  gods  and  goddesses  are  divided 
about  his  success,  and  Jupiter  himself  is  not  knowing  his 
own  mind,  either,  whether  to  favor  the  Trojans  or  the 
Latins.  Behold  how  weak  migJiiy  Jupiter  appears,  (iEneis 
IX,  801) :  "  Sed  manus  e  castris  propere  coit  omnis  in  unum  ; 
Nee  contra  vires  audet  Saturnia  Juno  sufficere :  aeriam  coelo 
nam  Jupiter  Irim  demisit,  germanae  hand  mollia  jussa 
ferentem."  Thus  Jupiter  is  not  very  complimentary  to 
his  spouse. 

There  is  no  denying,  the  divine  ideals  of  Greeks  and 
Romans,  poets  and  people,  were  not  over  refined,  and  their 
notions  about  human  rights  and  duties,  the  rights  of  the 


64  SPIRIT    OF   THf]    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

strangers,  the  weak,  the  conquered,  etc.,  were  just  as  crude. 
The  Bible  is  therefore  outstanding,  sublime  and  alone,  in 
those  remote  ages,  teaching :  "  For  thy  God  is  great  and 
powerful,  and  above  all  the  gods,  who  favors  no  person  and 
accepts  no  bribes.  He  loves  the  stranger  and  gives  him 
bread  and  raiment.  He  pleads  for  the  widow  and  the  orphan. 
Love  the  stranger,  for  strangers  ye  were  in  Egypt."  {Y, 
M.  10,  17).  The  Bible  alone  starts  from  the  firm  rock  of  an 
omnipotent  and  all-just  God,  who  favors  none  and  discrimi- 
nates against  none,  and  hence  it  arrives  at  the  conclusion  of 
justice  and  kindness  to  the  stranger  and  the  helpless,  to  the 
child  and  the  woman. 

The  Benjaminite  War. 

There,  too,  we  find  an  analogy  to  the  story  of  Helena  and 
Paris.  It  is  in  Judges,  19.  Read  and  see  what  a  difference 
between  the  Biblical  and  the  Homeric  spirit. 

In  the  Bible  we  find  no  exaggerations,  no  heaven-tower- 
ing poetries,  no  embellishments;  nothing  but  plain  matters 
of  fact.  Man  and  woman,  honesty  and  dishonesty,  act  and 
speak  without  paint  and  hyperbole.  It  is  a  picture  of 
nature ;  no  poetic  lies.  Read  and  compare :  A  humble 
Levite  is  returning  home  with  his  mistress  after  a  pleasant 
visit  to  her  parents.  They  arrive  at  a  wicked  place  among 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  and  find  some  isolated,  kind  hospi- 
tality, but  are  roughly  treated  by  the  youth.  The  poor 
mistress  is  abused,  and  dies  of  that  maltreatment.  The 
entire  nation  is  aroused  over  the  indignity  ofi'ered  to  a 
forlorn  woman.  A  national  war  ensues,  and  that  wicked 
place  and  its  surroundings,  with  the  entire  tribe,  are  nearly 
extirpated,  after  a  short  but  most  bloody  war.  The  entire 
nation,  with  their  ecclesiastical  and  lay  leaders,  as  one 
man,  fight  that  battle  for  purity  and  right  owing  to  strangers 
and  to  womanhood.  There  is  no  wavering  and  hesitating, 
no  petty  jealousies  and  backthoughts,  as  we   find  in  the 


BIBLICAL    EXPRESSIONS    FOR    FOREIGNER.  65 

Iliad,  among  the  very  leaders  of  the  expedition.  With 
different  feelings  do  we  rise  from  the  reading  of  the  Iliad 
and  from  that  of  Judges,  chapter  19.  The  former  leaves 
back  a  feeling  of  deep  sadness ;  the  other  offers  the  conso- 
lation that  wrong  is  righted,  though  at  an  immense  cost. 
Why  this  difference?  The  cause  is  that  the  Ebrew  leaders 
did  not  claim  to  be  descendants  from  the  gods,  nor  did  they 
fable  stupidities  about  them  on  a  par  with  themselves. 
They  had  nobler  conceptions  of  the  Deity,  and  having  a 
higher  and  purer  idea  of  that,  they  had  a  nobler  conception 
of  the  rights  of  man  ;  of  those  of  the  poor  and  stranger,  and 
of  helpless  womanhood.  The  mistress  of  the  Levite  was  not 
the  daughter  of  the  gods,  nor  the  wife  of  a  king,  nor  a 
divine  miracle  of  beauty,  as  Helena.  She  was  a  pilegesh, 
the  semi-wife  of  a  nameless  Ebrew,  journeying  as  a  stranger. 
But  he  and  she  were  fellow-citizens  ;  he  was  a  lowly  man,  she 
was  a  helpless  woman,  and  the  entire  nation  felt  the  insult 
and  injustice  done  to  these  poor  strangers,  and  the  entire 
nation  arose  to  punish  and  avenge  that  crime.  There  is  no 
doubt,  a  nobler  conception  of  God  yields  a  better  man,  a 
nobler  people,  and,  fairer  justice  to  native  and  alien;  and 
these  ideas  mankind  owes  to  the  Bible. 

Biblical  Expressions  for  Foreigner. 

The  biblical  expressions  for  foreigner  are  manifold,  viz : 
Zor,  meaning  one  not  belonging  to  the  same  tribe  or  caste. 
So  the  Israelite  was  a  Zor  opposite  to  the  priest  in  the 
temple ;  to  perform  sacrificial  service  was  in  him  usurpa- 
tion and  sacrilege.  In  the  same  sense  was  the  Gentile  a  Zor 
opposite  to  the  Israelite  concerning  privileged  rites  and 
observances.  But  Zor  has  not  even  the  odor  of  tarharos, 
in  regard  to  positive  human  rights  and  duties  or  benevolent 
feelings. 

Next  comes  the  expression  ^^Nochri"  pretty  nearly 
coming  up  to  the  modern  word  outlandish  or  foreigner.     It 

5 


Q6  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

means  a  non-Ebrew  living  in  a  non-Judsean  country  of  Lis 
own  speecli  and  creed.  He  was  entitled  to  human  rights, 
not  to  civic  rights  and  privileges  in  Judaea.  The  Ebrew 
could  do  with  him  any  kind  of  business,  of  money  or 
goods,  for  mutual  interest  or  profit.  That  was  forbidden 
among  his  fellows,  where  such  was  done  only  for  kindness 
sake  and  as  a  mutual  assistance. 

Next  follows  "Guer/'  the  immigrant,  a  Gentile  passing 
over  into  the  biblical  State;  and  when  permanently  domi- 
ciliated there,  he  was  termed  Gue?'  Toslidb  or  Shaar.  He 
could  be  naturalized  when  not  practicing,  publicly,  idolatry 
and  living  up  to  the  universal  moral  law,  without  having 
adopted  the  Mosaic  creed  proper.  He  then  enjoyed  all 
civic  rights  and  privileges  ;  he  was  termed  brother,'  he  could 
live  there,  work,  earn  wages,  get  rich,  acquire  property  and 
occupy  office,  except  kingship  and  priesthood.  When  a 
slave,  he  was  not  delivered  up  to  his  former  master ;  when 
poor,  he  was  provided  side  by  side  with  the  Ebrew  poor, 
widows  and  orphans.  Everywhere  he  is  recommended 
equally  with  them  to  the  justice  and  tenderness  of  the 
State.  (Maleachi  3,  5 ;  Zach.  7, 10.)  In  that  solemn  covenant 
on  Mounts  Garisim  and  Ebal  (V.  M.  27,  19),  the  lawgiver 
pronounces  the  curse  of  God  ''  against  whosoever  will  bend 
the  judgment  of  the  stranger."  When  he  adopted  the 
Mosaic  creed  he  was  termed  Guer  Zedek,  or  proselyte,  and 
was  assimilated  to  Israel  in  a  religious  respect,  too. 

The  Talmud  on  Strangers. 

In  Mishna  and  Talmud  we  find,  indeed,  expressions  which 
occasionally  seem  to  smell  of  the  Greek  word  harharos, 
though  never  going  so  far  as  to  declare  him  out  of  the  pale 
of  human  justice  or  even  dignity.  Such  terms  are  Akkum, 
the  notaricon  of  a  compound  expression  meaning  "  worship- 
ers of  the  stars,"  or,  in  general,  idolaters.  The  worst  the  Tal- 
mudists  have  ever  enacted  against  Gentiles  was  aimed  against 


THE    RABBIS   COXCERNING   GENTILES.  67 

these  Akkum,  or  idolaters,  first  by  following  the  Mosaic 
severe  injunctions  against  Canaanites.  More  probably  it 
was  directed  against  those  Romans  and  Greeks  who  had 
made  upon  them  and  their  people  such  a  war  of  extirpation 
during  the  first  three  centuries  of  the  current  era,  had 
robbed  them  of  their  country,  killed  them  by  the  millions 
in  war,  slaughtered  them  in  the  hippodrome  and  sold  them 
into  slavery  after  the  war  was  over. 

A  somewhat  milder  expression  than  Akkum  is  Ammim 
and  hen  Noack,  meaning  simply  a  non-Israelite,  of  the 
Gentile  nation,  or  a  son  of  Noach,  the  Patriarch.  The  word 
Goy  finally  means  simply  gens — nation,  tribe  or  each  indi- 
vidual of  them.  Israel,  too,  is  called  Goy,  sometimes,  but 
rarely,  with  the  addition  of  "  holy."  Goy,  thus,  is  not  the 
equivalent  of  harharos,  as  often  believed  by  the  ignorant. 
(See  I.  M.,  19,  6 ;  Y.  M.,  4,  8  ;  and  Isaiah,  26,  2.) 

The  Habbis  Concerning  Gentiles. 

As  a  striking  proof  that  the  Rabbis  had  least  of  racial 
prejudice,  closely  following  Mosaism,  and  that  they 
abhorred  idolatry  for  the  sake  of  its  cruelties,  absurdities, 
licentiousness,  its  stupefying  effects  upon  the  masses,  but 
hated  not  the  Gentiles  simply  as  non-Jews,  may  serve  the 
following  quotations.  Indeed,  how  could  they  ?  Believers 
in  the  doctrine  of  one  creative  Omnipotence  and  one  parental 
couple,  they  had  to  accept,  as  result,  one  right  for  native  and 
for  stranger;  hence  there  was  very  little  room  left  for  racial 
bigotry — except  when  hidden  under  the  cloak  of  idolatry- 
Otherwise  it  was  with  Hindoos  and  Egyptians,  Greeks  and 
Romans,  etc.,  who  believed  in  castes  or  dijfferent  origins  of 
races  and  ge'iis,  descendants  from  different  gods  and  divers 
parents.  These  progenitors  were  often  at  war  with  each 
other.  Such  polytheistic  notions,  applied  to  the  different 
sections  of  mankind,  could  not  but  make  war  the  leading 
idea  of  the  State,  and  hence  racial  hate  and  contempt  were 


68  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

dominant  features  in  ancient  societies.  There  the  stranger 
was  a  foreigner,  the  foreigner  was  an  enemy;  the  enemy 
was  not  above  the  wild  beast ;  war  upon  him,  booty,  enslave- 
ment, murder  were  deemed  just  and  glorious.  This  was  the 
necessary  sequel  of  idolatry. 

No  doubt,  as  said  above,  there  are  in  the  Talmud  many 
harsh  expressions  against  the,  then.  Gentiles.  These  date 
from  the  times  of  the  wars  of  extermination  against  the 
Ebrews,  during  the  first  three  centuries  of  the  present  era, 
waged  by  Romans  and  Greeks.  And  who  will  think  too  hard 
of  harsh  words  uttered  in  exchange  of  bloody  deeds  ?  .  .  . 
Nor  must  we  misunderstand  why  the  Rabbinical  Law  so 
intensely  hated  idolatry,  no  less  than  the  Biblical  one. 
We  need  only  read  of  the  superstition,  the  cruelty,  the 
unnatural  vices,  the  subversion  of  all  morality,  chastity^ 
right  and  reason,  connected  with  idolatry,  to  fully  under- 
stand that  antipathy.  The  following  pages  will  afford  us 
ample  opportunity  for  illustrating  the  immense  moral  and 
intellectual  superiority  of  Judaea  over  the  religions  of 
ancient  paganism,  the  ethereal  and  sublime  heights  of  Sinai 
and  Carmel  over  Mounts  Olympos  and  Ida,  and  hence  the 
horror  thereof  in  Judsea. 

But  as  soon  as  both  these  elements,  the  horror  of  idolatry 
and  the  bitter  sense  of  persecution,  were  out  of  sight,  the 
Rabbinical  law,  as  the  biblical  one,  is  remarkably  tolerant. 
Thus  we  read  (in  Megillah  13):  "Who  denies  idolatry  is 
called  a  Jew."  (^)  The  following  passages  go  to  the  same 
point.     (Sanhedrin  96,  h.) : 

"  The  righteous  of  all  nations  participate  in  eternal  life.'^ 
Sefra  (to  Sanhedrin,  59)  says:  ''A  great  many  biblical 
verses  mention  that  the  righteous  are  most  pleasing  to  God  y 
the  ^righteous,''  simply,  not  the  priests,  the  Levites  or 
Israelites,  for  even  the  Gentiles  are  included  therein." 
That  means  :    "  God  cares  for  moral  goodness,  not  for  race, 

•ni.T  N-lpJ  T"j;3  -I£13n  ^3    (1) 


THE    RABBIS    CONCERNING   GENTILES.  69 

caste  or  condition." — This  was  Paul's  reasoning  to  the 
Gentiles;  this  his  lever  to  move  the  world.  He  admitted 
them  into  the  pale  of  Monotheism  on  the  sole  ground  of 
the  moral  law,  without  insisting  upon  the  ceremonial  one, 
as  binding  alone  upon  the  Jew.  (Baba.  Bathra  10,  b.)  reads: 
^*  Since  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  the  sacrificial  service 
has  been  supplanted  by  benevolence,  indiscriminately,  for 
Jew  and  Gentile." 

In  Sanhedrin  58,  &.,  we  read :  "A  heathen  occupying  with 
the  Thorah  (Bible)  is  as  good  as  the  high  priest." — (Cholin 
13) :  The  heathens  nowadays  are  no  longer  idolaters ;  they 
but  follow  thoughtlessly  the  customs  of  their  fathers.(^) — 
(Sanhedrin  38) :  The  Bible  teaches  but  one  God  and  one 
parental  couple.  Why  ?  In  order  to  obviate  to  any  pride 
of  origin  (as  castes  in  Hindostan  and  Egypt),  and  that 
nobody  should  think  theft  and  murder  of  other  races 
allowable. — Rabbi  Gamaliel  II  and  Rabbi  Akiba  (of  second 
century,  Palestine)  subscribe  to  that  equality  in  all  legal 
matters.  (See  Baba  Kama,  35  and  113).— Tosephta  Baba. 
Kama,  10,  adds:  "To  rob  a  Gentile  is  worse  than  to  rob  a 
fellow  Jew,  for  there  is  additional  desecration  of  God's 
name,"('') — (Cholin,  94.)  Rabbi  Samuel  declares : '/'  It  is  for- 
bidden to  steal  people's  good  opinion;  so  it  is,  even  of  an 
idolater."(^)  Everywhere  in  Mishna,  Talmud  and  Casu- 
ists there  is  no  trace  of  unfair  discrimination  between  Jew 
and  Gentile  in  all  legal  matters,  closely  following  up  the 
Mosaic  law  in  this  regard;  they  stigmatize  usury  and 
forbid  it  toward  a  Gentile  as  toward  a  Jew.  It  is,  unfor- 
tunately, the  Middle  Age  Church — interpreting  wrongly 
a  Bible  verse — that  thought  the  Jew  can  take  interest  of  a 
Gentile,  even  when  a  countryman,  and  force  him  into  the 
pawnbroker's  shop,  thereby  drawing  upon  him  fresh  ill-wil 

.Dnn'3  nn-nUN'  jnjo   (i) 

.DtM  ^'i^-'n  'JLD    .^NiK'^  ^TJO  'ij  ^n  "ii»n    (2) 

.n"iDy  hv  i^^DN  ,nyn  iy\i   (3) 


70  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

from  liis  neighbors,  cursing  that  privilege.  Rabbi  Simlai, 
(third  century)  says,  quoting  the  Psalm:  "  Who  shall  ascend 
the  mount  of  the  Lord?  Who  shall  enter  his  sanctuary? 
He  who  walketh  in  righteousness  .  .  .  and  gives  not  his 
money  on  usury."  "  Not  either  to  a  heathen,''^  (Makkoth,  24,) 
adds  the  teacher. — R.  Hunnah  (fourth  century)  quotes  the 
known  verse  :  "  Who  increases  his  wealth  by  usury  hoards 
it  for  the  benefit  of  the  friends  of  the  poor;"  that  means 
those  who  take  usury  of  the  Gentiles  (Baba  Mezia,  70.) — 
Usurers  are  stigmatized  as  apostates  and  atheists  and  are 
not  admitted  to  the  Rabbinical  witness  box  (Sanhedrin,  3). — 
"  Usurers  are  like  murderers,  they  can  never  atone  for  their 
crimes,"  (Baba  Bathra,  90.) — That  will  sufiice  to  show  that 
the  Rabbis  had  no  small  horror  of  the  pawnbroker's  shop, 
and  warned  their  flock  often  enough  against  it.  Unfor- 
tunately, the  Middle  Age  Church  and  State  shut  against 
them  all  avenues  of  an  honest  livelihood,  leaving  open  but 
that  one  for  them. — Jalkut,  250  h.,  remarks'  that  at  the 
Jerusalem  Temple,  on  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  seventy 
bullocks  were  offered  for  the  seventy  nations  (mankind)  to 
pray  for  their  welfare.  The  same,  page  267,  says  :  "  Who 
robs  a  heathen  will  not  spare  a  Jew  either.  There  is  but 
one  law  for  Jew  and  Gentile." — (Gittin,  61.)  It  is  our  duty 
to  feed  the  heathen  poor,  nurse  their  sick,  bury  their  dead, 
save  their  property  when  in  danger  and  keep  up  peace  and 
good-will. — In  Mainonides  Talm.  Thora,  we  read:  ''It  is 
our  duty  to  rise  before  an  old  Gentile  as  before  a  Jew 
(Gittin,  60),  and  to  greet  him,  as  a  mark  of  respect  (Aboda 
Sara,  6);  to  send  presents  to  Gentiles  on  their  festive 
days,"  etc. 

Later  Casuists  and  Moralists  on  Gentiles. 

Tana  de  be  Elia  (tenth  century)  chapter  9,  begins :  "  I  call 
heaven  and  earth  to  witness  that  all  mankind,  without  any 
difference  of  creed  or  condition,  free   or   slave,  are  to  be 


LATER    CASUISTS    AND   MORALISTS   ON   GENTILES.  71 

judged  only  by  their  deeds,  not  creeds.  "  Whosoever  holds 
converse  with  us  is  owe  brother,  and  it  is  unlawful  to  over- 
reach him,  .  .  .  and  whosoever  is  guilty  of  fraud  against 
him  J  desecrates  the  name  of  God." 

In  the  twelfth  century  flourished  R.  Jehuda  the  pious. 
In  h;s  "  Book  of  the  Pious  "he  repeatedly  enjoins  :  "  Over- 
reach nobody,  be  peaceful,  be  honest  in  thy  dealings  and 
never  take  advantage  of  anybody,  without  any  discrimina- 
tion, whether  Jew  or  Gentile,  or  you  desecrate  the  name  of 
Israel  and  his  law." 

Mainonides,  (Egypt,  twelfth  century),  Jad.  on  Kings,  10, 12, 
says :  "Any  Gentile  observing  the  moral  law  is  entitled  to 
our  respect,  to  our  benevolence,  charities  and  all  amenities, 
just  as  Israelites  are." — R.  Moses  de  Coucy  (thirteenth  cen- 
tury) in  his  work  8emag,  143,  enjoins :  "  Never  overreach 
any  one,  Jew  or  Gentile,  but  be  just  and  fair  to  everybody." 

R.  Isaac  ben  Shesheth,  of  North  Africa  (fifteenth  cen- 
tury) declares  in  his  "  Responses,  119"  :  ''  Christians  are  to 
be  considered  as  (Guer  Toshab)  semi-proselytes  to  Judaism, 
hence  are  they  entitled  to  all  practical  rights  and  privileges 
of  Jews.  The  same  is  the  opinion  of  R.  Joseph  Caro  (in 
Baith  Joseph,  266)  (fifteenth  century,  Palestine.)  The  same 
says  Moses  ben  Nachman  (seventeenth  century)  in  his  book 
of  the  Laios  :  "  We  are  bound  to  save  the  lives  of  Christians 
in  any  danger  of  fire,  water,  etc." 

So  Beer  Hagola  (seventeenth  century  to  Choshen  Mishpat, 
chapter  425) :  "  All  the  harsh  enactments  of  the  Talmud 
concerning  the  Gentiles  have  reference  only  to  ancient 
times  of  idolatry.  TLe  Gentiles  of  to-day  keep  the  leading 
principles  of  religion,  and  hence  do  we  owe  them  all  good 
will  and  benevolence." 

R.  Isekiel  Landau,  of  Prague  (eighteenth  centurj^),  in  his 
"Responses,"  says:  "I  state  expressly  that  in  all  legal 
affairs,  concerning  theft,  fraud,  robbery,  murder,  etc.,  there 
is  nu  difference  whatever  between  Jew  and  Gentile,  and  that 


72  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  Talmudical  expression  of  Goim  or  ATckum  (idolaters) 
has  no  reference  whatever  to  the  present  nations  among 
whom  we  dwell." 

Dr.  I.  Hamburger,  of  Stettin,  delivered  an  excellent 
lecture  on  the  above  subject  in  1880,  to  which  we  refer  our 
readers  for  any  further  information. 

I  close  with  the  eighteenth  century,  the  era  of  Moses 
Mendelssohn,  the  era  of  pure  and  exalted  humanitarianism, 
represented  by  Mendelssohn  and  Lessing,  the  noble  pair 
that  closed  the  sectarian  dark  ages  and  inaugurated  the  era 
of  fraternization  of  creeds  and  races — "  the  true  Renais- 
sance "  of  man. 

Review  of  Biblical  Toleratiox. 

What  have  we  seen  concerning  the  status  of  the  stranger 
in  the  biblical  and  post-biblical  writings  ?  The  following  : 
The  stranger  in  Judsea  adopting  the  universal  moral  law, 
though  not  yet  the  Mosaic  creed,  was  entitled  to  all  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  the  Judsean,  and  was  termed  a 
brother.  If  a  fugitive  slave,  he  was  to  be  protected  and 
not  to  be  delivered  over  to  his  master.  He  was  allowed  to 
compete,  to  work  and  earn  wages  and  thrive.  He  could 
acquire  lands;  nay,  he  could  acquire  as  servants  full- 
blooded  Israelites,  for  the  legal  term  of  six  years,  or  until 
the  Jubilee.  Read  how  justice  was  stronger  than  national 
prejudice  (Levit.  25,  47) :  "When  the  Gentile  stranger  will 
thrive,  and  thy  countryman,  impoverished,  be  sold  to  that 
stranger  domiciled  with  thee,  the  sold  Ebrew  shall  have 
the  privilege  of  redemption  by  one  of  his  relatives ;  a  fair 
compensation  shall  take  place  according  to  the  years  of 
service  until  the  Jubilee.  Should  he  not  be  redeemed,  then 
he  shall  go  free  on  the  Jubilee,  he  and  his  children."  You 
see,  the  lawgiver's  heart,  of  course,  yearns  at  the  thought 
of  an  indigenous  Ebrew  sold  to  a  foreign  Gentile,  thriving 
there  where  the  native  impoverishes.     Does  he  cry  at  over- 


REVIEW   OF   BIBLICAL   TOLERATION.  73 

reacliing,  usury,  blood-sucking?  No;  riglit  is  right,  and 
property  is  property.  He  can't  go  against  facts.  The  native 
got  poor  and  was  sold  to  the  wealthy  foreigner,  and  he 
must  stick  to  the  bargain.  The  lawgiver  calls  upon  the 
relatives  to  come  and  redeem  their  kinsman.  But  if  they 
do  not,  then  the  Ebrew  bondsman  stays.  Only  at  the 
Jubilee  he  goes  free.  "  For  mine  are  the  children  of  Israel, 
my  servants  they  are,  redeemed  from  Egypt."  (Levit. 
25,  55.) 

What  a  noble  national  pride,  tempered  by  meek  submis- 
sion to  the  laws  of  equity  and  justice  towards  a  Gentile  and 
stranger !     Reader,  ponder  over  that. 

The  domiciled  Gentile  immigrant  could  intermarry  when 
he  fully  adopted  the  Mosaic  creed  and  nationality.  If  he 
would  not,  he  was  not  debarred  from  any  civic  rights  in 
the  State.  He  was  not  dragooned  into  the  Ebrew  Church, 
nor  wliipped  into  the  Ebrew  marriage,  nor  excluded  from 
privileged  trades  or  employments  or  streets,  nor  put  into  a 
ghetto,  nor  had  he  to  wear  a  yellow  patch  for  discrimina- 
tion. King  David  was  the  offspring  of  a  poor  Moabite 
woman.  King  Solomon  wedded  an  Egyptian  princess. 
Hundreds  of  thousands  of  Gentiles  lived  peaceably  among 
the  Jews  as  fellow-citizens  under  the  Davidians,  the  Has- 
moneans  and  the  Herodians.  Thus,  Jhree  thousand  years 
ago  the  Bible  proclaimed  the  law  of  human  fellowship — 
"  Love  thy  stranger.  Oppress  not  the  stranger.  Love  him 
as  thyself."  The  founders  of  Christianity,  Jews,  too,  abro- 
gated the  race  question,  and  declared  all  Gentiles  embracing 
Monotheism  as  children  of  God,  participating  in  divine 
grace,  conform  to  Bible  and  Talmud. 

Thus  Mosaism  does  not  simply  teach  religion  in  the 
abstract.  No,  it  is  practical  and  realistic ;  so  that  to  worship 
God  means  justice  and  love  to  men,  indiscriminately.  One 
God  means  harmonious  creation ;  means  good-will  and 
peace  to  all,  one  right  and  one  duty  for  all.     Right  creed 


74  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

means  right  deed.  Theology  is  not  a  dead  letter.  No,  it  is 
a  principle  of  life,  permeating,  vivifying,  quickening  body 
and  soul,  the  individual,  the  family  hearth,  the  relation  of 
classes  and  of  masses,  natives  and  aliens.  State  and  society, 
all,  effacing  the  word  stranger,  making  all  men  one  family, 
worshiping  one  Maker. 

As  to  the  later  Rabbinical  law,  though  sometimes  giving 
back  hard  words  for  bloody  blows,  though  erecting  Chinese 
walls  to  screen  its  followers  from  assimilation,  it  neverthe- 
less never  lost  sight  of  the  fact  of  one  right  for  Jew  and 
Gentile,  and  never  discriminated  in  matters  of  fact,  in 
right,  benevolence,  charity,  amenity,  and  politeness,  ask- 
ing the  same  respect  for  the  rights  and  virtues  of  all,. 
Christian,  Parsee  or  Mohammedan,  with  whom  it  came  in 
contact. 

BiSM  A  rck'«    B  [ASES  . 

Whilst  writing  these  lines,  I  felt  startled  in  just  now 
reading,  in  the  daily  papers,  the  following  cable  news  of 
to-day,  April  29th,  1893.  It  reads  as  if  it  were  dated  from 
1693.     At  an  interview.  Prince  Bismarck  said  : 

"I  was  never  a  friend  to  the  Jews,  owing  to  my  education. 
I  was  in  1847  the  adversary  of  Jewish  emancipation,  which 
I  subsequently  favored  in  1869,  because  the  late  Baron 
Bleschroeder  appreciated  my  national  projects.  The  reap- 
pearance of  anti-Semitism  after  an  epoch  of  speculation  is 
natural,  because  the  deceived  people  confound  capitalism 
with  Judaism.  .  .  , 

"  In  1880  the  anti-capitalist  movement  could  have  been 
moderated  only  by  the  safety-valve  of  anti-Jewism.  The 
Ahlwardt  era  will  result  in  politics  with  no  important  or 
lasting   consequences. 

"  Prince  Bismarck  added  that  the  adoption  of  legal  means 
against  the  Jews  would  be  useless,  and  expressed  the  opinion 
that   the   cross-breeding   of  the   Ebrew  and  Gentile  races 


Bismarck's  biases.  75 

would  gradually  bring  about  a  settlement  of  the  vexatious 
question." 

Thus  in  1893,  in  cultured  Germany,  in  the  country  of 
Mendelssohn,  Boerne,  Heine,  Baron  Hirsch,  etc.!  Prince 
Bismarck,  the  assumed  architect  of  Germanic  unity,  was 
just  interviewed  on  anti-SeTnitism,  or  the  feasibility 
whether  a  class  of  people  living  in  Germany  just  as  long  as 
the  Teutonic  nations  do,  shall  be  worsted,  because  they 
worship  God  after  the  fashion  of  their  fathers;  because 
they  claim  to  live  according  to  that  very  same  Mosaic  law 
we  just  now  speak  of;  that  law  that  over  three  thousand 
years  ago  proclaimed  to  the  world  the  brotherhood  of 
the  entire  humankind  ;  that  taught :  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself,"  "Love  the  stranger  as  thyself."  Yea, 
some  of  its  votaries  even  taught  "  Love  thine  enemy  as 
thyself."  Anti-Semitism  is  agitating  against  half  a  million 
of  that  biblical  people.  And  what  is  Bismarck  saying  in 
the  interview?  Ho  is  very  philosophical,  very  composed, 
whilst  some  of  his  neighbors  are  about  firing  the  roofs  of 
other  neighbors.  Drinking  his  bock-beer  and  smoking  his 
long  pipe,  he  delivers  himself  with  the  ambiguity  of  an 
ancient  oracle.  Not  for  a  moment  does  he  allude  to  justice 
and  fairness  and  decency  deeply  involved  therein.  Not 
even  to  State — wisdom  and  utility.  He  begins :  "  I  was 
never  a  friend  of  the  Jews,  owing  to  my  education."  That 
is  frank,  indeed !  But  why,  Prince,  don't  you  correct  your 
educational  prejudices  at  your  age  of  seventy-eight?  It  is 
never  too  late. — "  In  1847  I  was  an  adversary  of  Jewish  eman- 
cipation."— Why  were  you  so,  Sir?  Again  prejudice,  in  a 
statesman! — "Which  Jewish  emancipation  I  subsequently 
favored,  because  of  Baron  Bleschroeder."  Ah,  so !  Baron 
Bleschroeder's  money  did  it !  Why  not  rather  on  account  of 
the  gold  mines  in  the  Bible  ? — the  justice  and  the  wisdom  as 
in  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament,  both  teaching:  "Love 
thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  as  a  leading  doctrine?     Why  not 


76  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

rather  in  imitation  of  America  or  of  civilized  Europe? 
Prince,  you  claim  to  be  a  religionist,  a  Christian! — "The 
people  confound  capitalism  with  Judseaism."  Are  you  not, 
perhaps,  Prince  Bismarck,  the  cause  of  that  confusion? 
You  sided  with  freeing  the  Jews  for  Bleschroedei-'s  sake. 
Did  you  not  thereby  set  the  fatal  example  of  confounding 
religion  with  capitalism?  Why  not  rather,  for  the  sake  of 
Moses,  Isaiah,  Hillel,  Jesus,  Paul,  Washington  or  Monte- 
fiore?  "In  1880  the  anti-capital  movement  could  be  mod- 
erated only  by  the  safety-valve  of  anti-Jewism."  That 
frankness  is  astonishing!  After  freeing  the  Jews  in  1869 
on  account  of  Bleschroeder's  capital,  they  had  to  be  sacri- 
ficed in  1880  to  save  the  capitalists!  You  offered  them  up 
as  a  scape-goat  to  Mammon.  Remember  the  adage.  Prince  : 
"  One  mistake  brings  another. ''  Are  nations  to  be  handled 
as  figures  on  the  chess-board?  Prince,  you  sacrificed  the 
"knight"  to  save  the  "queen."  Had  Bismarck  helped 
emancipating  the  Jews  because  it  is  just  and  wise,  there 
would  never  have  come  the  occasion  for  arousing  anti- 
Semitism  as  a  safety-valve  for  the  capitalists.  "One  mis- 
take brings  another."  Here  are  the  fruits  of  a  Machiavelian 
policy.  "Honesty  alone  is  a  safe  policy,"  in  the  long-run  of 
history. — "  The  Ahlwardt  era  will  have  no  important 
result."  I  hope  not.  But  in  the  meantime  it  disgraces  the 
century;  it  dishonors  civilization;  it  renders  unhappy  its 
victims;  it  fills  with  dismay  all  honest  men  of  enlightened 
Germany;  entire  civilized  society  feels  unsafe  at  such  an 
equivocal  policy  used  in  such  high  quarters. 

"  Love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  is  the  only  safe  social 
basis.  As  to  Ahlwardt,  Bismarck  must  not  forget,  either,  that 
"Ahlwardt's  era"  is  but  a  phase  in  Bismarck's  era.  History 
will  hold  the  latter  responsible  for  the  former.  Prince 
Bismarck  alone  is  dangerous.  Here  I  remember  the  prayer : 
"God  save  me  from  my  friends;  as  to  my  enenies,  I'll  take 
care  of  myself." — "  The  adoption  of  legal  means  against  the 


Bismarck's  biases.  77 

Jews  would  be  useless."  No,  Prince,  it  would  be  dangerous, 
hurtful  and  shameful!  Consider:  to-day,  Jews;  to-morrow, 
Catholics ;  Socialists,  Liberals,  Democrats,  etc.,  next.  Where 
will  you  stop  ?  "  War  of  all  against  all  ?  " — "  The  cross- 
breeding of  Hebrew  and  Gentile  would  gradually  settle  that 
vexatious  question."  Prince  Bismarck  is  amiable  when  he 
wants  to  be.  But  we  must  not  forget  the  words  of  Lessing's 
(Nathan  the  Wise's)  Judge,  in  the  known  allegory  of  "The 
Three  Rings,"  answering  that  question,  viz:  "By  kindness, 
justice  and  urbanity  let  each  party  prove  the  virtue  of  the 
true  Ming,  the  virtue  of  rendering  lovable  and  estimable." 
To  whip  a  man  into  the  nuptial  room  is  neither  good  policy 
nor  good  match-making.  Don't  you  remember  what  Shake- 
speare has  the  Jew  say  on  such  an  interesting  occasion  :  "Sir 
Antonio,  you  called  me  dog,  cut-throat,  and  spat  upon  my 
gabardine.  Shall  I  give  you  now  my  moneys  ?  "  You  send 
the  Jew  to  the  social  Ghetto,  abet  on  him  anti-Semitism,  kick 
him,  oust  him,  and  withal,  he  shall  marry  you  ?  Begin  with 
being  just  and  amiable,  and  then  sympathy  will  follow. 
"The  vexatious  question"  between  Jew  and  Gentile,  Prince, 
will  be  settled  without  any  dragooning  to  the  dominant 
creed  nor  whipping  into  the  nuptial  room.  It  will  be  set- 
tled amicably  when  politics  will  not  be  governed  by  Mach- 
iavelism,  but  by  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself." 
AVhen  people  will  worship  God  in  sincerity,  then  they  will 
love  man  without  discrimination.  When  the  Jew  will  be 
a  sincere  Jew  and  the  Christian  a  sincere  Christian,  then  a 
cordial  understanding  will  be  reached.  For  the  time  being, 
the  doctrines  of  "Love  thy  neighbor,"  "Love  the  stranger; 
do  not  overreach  nor  oppress  him,"  taught  three  thousand 
years  ago,  is  yet  an  ideal.  For  the  present,  Prince  Bismarck 
has  invented  Pan-Germanism  with  two  millions  of  soldiers. 
He  is  an  admirer  of  the  Czar,  with  Pan-Slavism  and  three 
millions  of  soldiers.  He  was  a  friend  of  Napoleon  III,  the 
pretended  inventor  of  Pan-Latinism,  with  so  and  so  many 


78  SPIRIT    OF    THK    BIBIJCAL    LEGISLATIOX. 

millions  of  soldiers.  For  the  time  being,  the  Russians 
make  war  upon  tlie  Germans,  the  English,  Turks,  Poles,  etc., 
and  these  reciprocate  duly;  whilst  Prussia  is  distrusted  by- 
Germany  and  hated  by  France,  Austria,  Denmark,  Hanover, 
etc. 

In  Russia  we  see  ostracised  millions  of  Baltic  Germans. 
Thousands  of  disinherited,  starVing  families  are  ejected  in 
Ireland.  There  are  Christians  worsted,  and  there  Jews,  and 
there  Mohammedans.  The  Jews,  counting  many  millions 
in  Russia,  once  citizens  in  Poland,  formerly  masters  of  the 
great  Chazar  Kingdom  on  the  Volga,  later  swallowed  up  by 
Moscow,  are  treated  like  wild  beasts,  as  out  of  the  pale  of 
humanity.  They  are  dragged  away  in  the  night,  in  mid- 
winter, pillaged,  ravished,  famished,  and  forced  into  the 
Polish  pale  to  starve,  or  driven  into  exile  to  far-off  conti- 
nents as  pariahs  and  vagabonds.  Contemplate  the  fate  of 
the  Poles,  the  greatest  nation  of  the  North  yet  one  century 
ago,  now  broken,  gagged  and  distributed  as  the  price  for 
perfidy  Jiiid  remorseless  dynastic  ambition— a  national 
assassination  in  the  face  of  this  nineteenth  century  !  Behold 
gallant,  unhappy  Ireland !  What  a  heroic  fight  for  now 
three  hundred  years!  A  small  minority,  disinherited, 
impoverished,  ruined  by  selfish,  one-sided  legislation  and 
by  industrial  jealousy.  She  loses  not  courage;  she  goes  on 
fighting  for  her  inalienable  rights.  Judaea  and  Poland 
submit  in  despair.  Ireland  fights  on,  and  will  surely  con- 
quer. More  lucky  or  more  plucky !  Yet  Russians,  Ger- 
mans, French,  English,  Turks,  etc.,  etc.,  worship  the  Bible? 
which  is  repeating  a  thousand  times,  "  Thou  shall  love  the 
stranger  as  thyself  P  After  three  thousand  years  the  world 
has  yet  to  learn  that  doctrine.  They  swear  by  the  Bible, 
they  are  idolatrous  of  it,  but  they  do  not  practice  it. 
Ancient  and  modern  society  stand  yet  upon  egoism.  True 
love  and  justice  without  bias,  without  any  back-thought  of 
self,  family,  race  and  sect,  have  yet  to  be  learned.     All  the 


Bismarck's  biases.  79 

above-mentioned  "pans "  and  "  vexatious  questions  "  are 
but  ill-disguised  screens  for  brute  egoism.  The  Bible  alone, 
with  one  God  and  one  mankind,  rises  to  the  high  plane  of 
universal  right,  corresponding  to  universal  duty.  This, 
mankind  has  yet  to  learn.     Will  they  ever? 

The  march  of  history  seems  to  move  exceedingly  slow. 
Started  three  thousand  and  two  thousand  years  ago,  mankind 
has  just  invented  the  needle-gun,  dynamite  and  pan-Latin — 
Slav — and  Germanism .  Some  of  our  Americans  would  like  to 
follow  suit  with  "  Fan-Americanism."  The  contemplative 
beholder  is  nigh  despairing  of  human  progress.  But  let  us 
not  despair.  Let  us  rather  hopefully  labor  and  toil  for 
human  advance.  History's  march  is  slow,  yet  mankind 
moves  onwards.  Plato  and  Aristotle  yet  jeered  at  the 
^^hariarians'^  as  just  fit  for  spoil  and  the  yoke.  We,  two 
thousand  years  later,  have  at  least  the  courage  to  remember : 
"  Love  the  stranger  as  thyself ;"  and  let  us  hope  the  thought- 
ful reader  sympathizes  with  us. 


PAET   III. 
EQUAL  DISTRIBUTION  OF  NATIONAL  WEALTH. 


In  the  foregoing  pages  we  have  made  some  researches 
concerning  the  Mosaic  Civil  Code  as  set  forth  in  Laws  and 
Judgments  (II.  M.  2L)  AVe  have  seen  that  code  embodies 
four  cardinal  principles  in  reference  to  the  relation  of  the 
inhabitants  to  the  State.  The  absolute  liberty  of  the 
citizen  is  the  first  feature  thereof.  The  absolute  equality 
before  the  law  is  the  next  one.  The  economical  ratio,  the 
equal  distribution  of  wealth,  is  the  third.  Solidarity,  or 
community  of  interest,  is  the  last. 

We  have  already  treated  of  the  liberty  and  the  equality 
of  the  Judaean  State.  Now  we  shall  discuss  the  third 
feature,  intimately  connected  with  the  first  two. 

Let  us  take,  for  an  example,  England,  the  classical  coun- 
try of  individual  liberty  and  political  equality.  Is  there 
equality  a  real  fact?  Are  not  there  equal  duties,  rights 
and  chances  a  mockery?  a  cruel  wrong?  a  dead  letter? 
Compare  the  rights  and  duties,  claims  and  enjoyments,  of 
the  eldest  son  of  a  lord  and  those  of  a  son  of  the  working- 
man.  Of  what  avail  is  even  voting  to  the  poor  son  of 
Albion,  except  to  sell  his  vote  ?  Now,  this  is  the  result  of 
the  inequality  of  wealth.  Lord  A  and  Marquis  de  B  have 
respectively  the  yearly  rent  of  <£100,000  and  of  £60,000. 
Baroness  C  enjoys  one  of  half  a  million  pounds.  There  are 
a  few  hundreds  of  such  great  fortunes  in  England.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  are  in  London  alone  a  hundred  thousand 
paupers,  living  on   alms,  and   several  hundred   thousands 


SALISBURY,    CHAMBERLAIN,    HUXLEY.  81 

of  proletarians,  living-  from  hand  to  mouth,  neither  of 
them  knowing  what  the  morrow  would  bring  them  ;  whilst 
forty  thousand  lewd  women  infest  the  streets  in  dead 
night,  and  thousands  of  men  are  addicted  to  crime,  from 
lack  of  any  other  means  of  sustaining  life. 

Now,  behold  the  arduous  struggle  for  existence !  "  Where 
you  see  a  palace,  look  and  you  will  find  a  hundred  wretched 
huts,"  says  J.  J.  Rousseau.  "Ze  droit  du  peuple  &est  le 
pain,"  St.  Just  pointedly  said.  If  liberty  and  equality  were 
realities  and  not  mere  words,  then  every  young  man  and 
woman  starting  into  life  ought  to  have  the  same  chances  to 
succeed.  Have  we  all  the  same  chances  ?  By  no  means. 
Your  father  is  rich,  and  he  gave  you  an  education ;  mine 
was  poor,  and  my  education  is  neglected.  You  have  been 
raised  in  comfort,  and  hence  your  bodily  health ;  another 
one  in  misery  and  sickness.  You  have  powerful  and 
wealthy  relatives,  who  back  you  in  your  competition ;  his 
relatives  are  poor  and  helpless  themselves,  and  cannot 
afford  him  any  patronage.  Is  liberty  and  equality  here  of 
much  avail  ?  Think  of  a  battle — one  soldier  is  armed,  the 
other  is  not.  Two  persons  have  to  swim  across  a  dangerous 
stream — one  is  prepared  from  childhood  for  the  occasion, 
the  other  is  stiff  and  heavy.  Are  the  chances  equal?  Two 
persons  run  a  match  of  five  miles.  The  one  has  wings  at 
his  feet,  the  other  chains  dangling  down  his.  Who  will 
win?  What  value  has  liberty  and  equality  in  such  an  arena 
of  existence  ?  Hence,  liberty  and  equality  will  never  be 
complete  without  their  necessary  complement — equal  dis- 
tribution of  wealth  among  the  members  of  the  community. 

Salisbury,  Chamberlain,  Huxley. 

Some  years  ago  Lord  Salisbury,  the  English  Conservative 
leader,  made  a  sensational  motion,  a  la  Beaconsfield,  in  an 
effort  to  take  out  the  wind  from  the  sails  of  the  liberals. 
He  proposed  that  the  State  should  build  cheap  dwellings  for 


82  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  poor.  Professor  Huxley,  equal  to  the  emergency,  demon- 
strated the  futility  of  the  idea.  He  said,  "not  poor-rates 
and  poor-houses  and  poor-rents,  but  manhood — suffrage  and 
education,  would  remedy  the  evil  of  pauperism."  Mr.  Cham- 
berlain, on  another  similar  occasion,  remarked :  "  that  the 
rich  must  pay  a  ransom  to  the  poor."  The  fact  is,  we  have  to 
frame  such  laws,  as  to  give  each  person  the  same  chances 
in  the  arena  of  existence.  This  done,  and  in  the  course  of 
time,  we  shall  bring  about — not  by  communism  and  spolia- 
tion, but  by  the  natural  logic  of  things — we  shall  slowly 
succeed  in  bringing  about  a  desirable  sameness  of  wealth. 
Now  this  great  problem,  termed  the  Social  Question,  and 
recognized  as  of  first  political  importance,  the  Mosaic  law- 
giver has  well  known,  and  tried  to  solve  over  three  thousand 
years  ago,  by  several  great  and  far-reaching  economic  insti- 
tutions, standing  forth  in  bold  relief  tlirough  his  entire 
system,  as  bold  as  those  of  Lycurgus,  but  which,  for  reasons 
easy  to  explain,  have  been  mostly  overlooked  by  commen- 
tators. These  institutions  were  well  calculated  to  settle 
the  social  question  of  Ms  time  and  circumstances,  and  may 
contain  some  solution  for  our  times  too.  They  went  straight 
towards  bringing  about  equality  of  fortunes  among  the 
citizens.  This  solution  of  the  social  problem  the  lawgiver 
endeavored  to  reach,  first,  by  starting  with  a  just  distribu- 
tion of  the  national  wealth ;  next,  by  securing  one  day  out 
of  seven  as  a  respite  for  the  hard  working  masses  of  which 
we  shall  speak  later ;  then  by  a  set  of  laws  providing  for 
the  maintenance  of  that  average  economic  equality,  by 
providing  against  land  grabbing  and  accaparation,  by  equal 
chances  of  acquiring,  accumulating  and  keeping  wealth. 
All  that  he  did  without  resorting  to  the  unnatural  methods 
of  old  legislators,  or  to  the  dangerous  methods  of  modern 
crude  communism ;  upholding  property  as  a  fundamental 
and  sacred,  social  principle. 


JUBILEE   AND   SEPTENNATE.  83 


Jubilee  and  Septennate. 


We  Lave  said  that  in  order  to  make  liberty  and  equality 
a  reality,  it  is  urgently  necessary  to  insure  a  proximately 
equal  distribution  of  the  nation's  wealth.  For  in  spite  of 
individual,  personal  equality  and  liberty,  a  too  great  differ- 
ence of  wealth  will  soon  destroy  the  former  and  bring  about 
a  discrepancy  in  the  rights  and  duties  of  citizens.  Sooner 
or  later  the  rich  will  buy  out  or  squeeze  off  the  vote  of  the 
poor.  Legislative  science  has  not  yet  found  any  efficient 
remedy  against  this  greatest  of  social  evils.  This  evil  is 
nearly  as  great  in  America  as  in  England,  or  Russia, 
Turkey  and  China. 

Socialism  and  communism  try  their  hands  on  that 
problem,  recognized  in  our  times  as  the  Great  Social  Ques- 
tion, more  important  than  all  others,  political,  religious  and 
national  combined.  The  movement  began  with  St.  Simon, 
Owen  and  Fourier,  etc,  Karl  Marx,  Engels  and  Lasalle  are 
the  socialistic  apostles.  These  latter  ones  deprecate  appar- 
ently any  violent  expropriation,  yet  desire  for  the  Social 
Democracy  the  direction  of  all,  capital  and  labor,  parcelling 
out  to  each  citizen  his  work  and  his  emoluments.  As  yet 
the  system  is  not  settled,  and  offers  no  definite  base  for 
action. 

That  panacea  against  tbe  great  human  misery,  that  safety- 
valve  against  exorbitant  wealth  on  one  hand  and  abject 
pauperism  and  proletariat  on  the  other,  with  their  long  train 
of  misfortune,  discontent  and  crime, — that  panacea  was  sug- 
gested by  the  hoary  genius  of  Mosaism,  and  enacted  by  its 
legislation  over  three  thousand  years  ago.  It  is  the  Insti- 
tution of  the  Jubilee  with  its  subdivision,  the  Year  of 
Release,  both  basing  on  the  Sahbath.  In  II.  M.  23,  10,  the 
lawgiver  alludes  to  that  great  Sabbatic  Institution.  Whilst 
in  III.  M.  25,  the  entire  chapter  is  consecrated  to  it,  with  a 
gl-and  emphasis  of  speech  and  space,  fully  conscious  of  its 
paramount  importance. 


84  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATIOX. 

It  reads  :  "  Wlien  you  will  arrive  into  the  land  I,  God, 
am  giving  to  you,  then  tlie  soil  shall  have  a  rest  (Sabbath) 
to  God.  Thereupon  during  six  years  thou  shalt  sow  and 
reap  and  gather  in  thy  field  harvests  and  vineyard  crops. 
And  in  the  seventh  year  the  soil  shall  have  a  Sabbath — 
rest.  There  shall  be  no  sowing  and  no  reaping ;  whilst  the 
spontaneous  growth  shall  belong  to  thy  slaves,  thy  hire- 
lings, strangers,  and  cattle  for  their  food.  Thereupon  thou 
shalt  count  seven  weeks  of  years,  seven  times  seven  years, 
making  forty-nine  years.  Then  shalt  thou  have  the  solemn 
trumpet  sound  through  the  entire  land  on  the  tenth  day  of 
the  seventh  month,  on  the  day  of  Atonement.  And  ye 
shall  consecrate  the  fiftieth  year,  and  proclaim  freedom  to 
all  her  inhabitants.  It  shall  be  unto  you  a  Jiibilee.  And 
ye  shall  return  every  one  to  one's  own  inherited  lot,  and  to 
one's  own  family.  A  Jubilee-festival  shall  be  the  fiftieth 
year  unto  you.  No  sowing  nor  reaping  shall  take  place  on' 
it.  It  shall  be  a  consecrated  Jubilee-YQ2LV.  All  selling  and 
buying  of  the  soil  shall  be  in  accordance  with  the  computa- 
tion of  that  JuMlee-cycle.  Do  not  overreach  one  another. 
And  ye  shall  perforin  these  ordinances,  and  you  will  dwell 
safely  in  the  land.  ...  So  that  the  land  shall  not  be 
sold  for  ever.  For  Mine  is  the  land ;  you  are  but  My  immi- 
grants and  tenants.  Therefore  shall  you  grant  the  boon  of 
redemption  to  the  soil.  Should  anyone  sell  his  allot- 
ment, his  kinsman  shall  redeem  it.  And  if  he  can  not 
redeem  it,  the  sale  remains  good  till  the  Jubilee,  when  the 
acre  must  return  to  its  original  owner." 

Many  more  details  follow  thereupon.  This  is  the  grand 
Mosaic  institution  of  the  Jubilee,  one  of  the  boldest  eco- 
nomical suggestions  ever  uttered  by  a  lawgiver.  It  ordained 
that :  Every  fiftieth  year  everything  shall  be  restored  to  its 
originaT  condition.  The  entire  status  of  all  property  and  all 
social  relations  underwent  a  renovation.  Man  and  land  and 
houses,  dislocated  and  rent  asunder  heretofore,  reassumed 


JUBILEE    AND    SEPTENNATE.  85 

tlieir  pristine  status  to  eacli  other.  When  Joshua  had  con- 
quered Canaan,  he  divided  it  out  into  tribal  districts,  and 
these  again  into  family  lots.  The  entire  Israelitisli  people 
were  divided  into  twelve  tribes,  and  the  Levites  formed  extra 
a  thirteenth  one.  The  tribes  of  Reiiben,  Menasse  and  half 
of  Oad  were  assigned  to  the  territory  beyond  the  Jordan,  to 
conquered  Gilead.  Nine  and  one-half  tribes  were  placed 
this  side  of  the  Jordan,  in  Canaan  proper,  each  group  having 
a  territory  or  canton,  which  was  again  sub-divided  into 
districts,  boroughs  and  lots,  and  wherein  were  placed  the 
tribes,  gens,  families  and  all  male  individuals,  nuclei  of 
future  families.  The  Levites  had  their  hamlets  scattered 
among  all  the  tribes,  forming  the  connecting  link  of  all  and 
uniting  them  into  one  integral  nation.  Thus  every  and 
each  adult  Ebrew  had  a  lot  of  ground  assigned  to  himself 
and  his  future  posterity  for  ever  and  ever.  That  ground  he 
superintended,  tilled,  husbanded  and  enjoyed  its  produce, 
but  not  beyond  that.  It  was  disgraceful  to  alienate  it.  It 
was  considered  a  sacred  heirloom,  rather  to  improve  than  to 
disintegrate.  Remember  the  touching  and  tragic  story  of 
King  Acliab  usurping  Naboth's  family  vineyard  (II.  Kings, 
21).  Only  in  desperate  cases  was  it  sold  until  the  Juhilee. 
This  simply  means  that  the  owner  gave  away  its  crops,  till 
the  Jubilee,  for  a  consideration. 

Thus,  the  best  part  of  the  modern  socialistic  idea  was  at 
the  bottom  of  the  Mosaic  State.  The  State  owned  the  land. 
Jahveli,  the  kintf,  or  his  representative,  the  State,  was  the 
only  and  absolute  proprietor.  He  was  the  real  master  of  the 
soil,  then,  the  only  national  wealth,  and  he  remained  so  for- 
ever. The  citizens  were  simply  the  tenants  thereof;  they 
had  to  work  it  and  lived  upon  its  produce  ;  tliey  could  not 
alienate  it.  Thus  the  family-lot  remained  intact  for  pos- 
terity. No  one  of  the  Biblical  Society  was  born  poor,  nor 
was  any  one  born  over-rich  ;  no  one  could  acquire  his  neigh- 
bor's property  by  any  amount  of  power,  wealth  or  stratagem. 


86  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

Queen  Jesabel  had  to  hire  assassins  to  grab  a  vineyard.  The 
agglomeration  of  the  soil,  the  modern  large  property- 
holdings  were  impossible  there.  Originally  and  since  the 
very  occupation  of  Canaan,  the  approximate  equality  in 
property  among  the  Israelites  having  been  thus  established, 
the  care  of  the  lawgiver  was  now  to  keep  np  that  economic 
equality,  which  was  the  necessary  base  of  civil  liberty  and 
political  equality.  This,  Mosaism  was  endeavoring  to 
realize  by  the  Jubilee  and  Release-  Year  institutions.  Every 
fiftieth  year  all  sold  property  returned  to  its  original  owner. 
Hence,  the  two  extremes,  proletariat  and  grand  property- 
holdings,  could  not  grow  up.  The  Jiihllee  formed  every 
fifty  years  a  new  equalizing  readjustment  of  wealth,  on  the 
original  basis  of  apportionment  pro  capita.  The  Year  of 
Release  was  a  powerful  auxiliary  in  that  direction.  The 
Ebrew  slave  was  held  but  for  six  years.  In  the  seventh  he 
went  out  free.  Hence,  slavery  and  pauperism  were,  too, 
rendered  impossible.  Again,  with  the  arrival  of  that 
seventh  year,  all  debts  were  cancelled  (V.  M.,  15,  1,)  (Mai- 
monides,  Yad.  Release  and  Jubilee,  I  and  IX.)  (See,  too,  Philo 
Septenar,  1173.)  The  debtor  thus  got  rid  of  all  his  indebt- 
edness and  began  work  clear  of  all  former  obligations. 
These  seventh-year  and  fiftieth-year  institutions  amounted 
to  a  total  renovation  of  the  social  status,  a  real  "  restitutio 
in  iiitegruin.^''  They  were  mighty  bulwarks  against  Ebrew 
pauperism,  slavery  and  proletariat  on  one  hand,  and  on  the 
other  against  the  tyranny  of  great  landlordism,  of  accap- 
parating  all  the  soil  into  a  few  hands  and  all  the  poor  as 
their  clients  or  serfs.  Rome  and  Constantinople  were 
ruined  by  that  mode.  An  equal  distribution  of  wealth  was 
kept  up,  especially  as  the  lawgiver  did  not  encourage  either 
conquests  or  extensive  industries,  the  two  other  means  of 
enrichment  and  deterioration.  The  only  inheritance  was 
the  family  lot.  Thus,  a  fair  average  equality  of  wealth 
was  rendered  possible  and  actually  maintained  according  to 


SEPTENNATE    AND    INDEBTEDNESS.  87 

the  Mosaic  sclieine,  without  resorting  to  violent  means,  as 
the  Gracchi,  etc.,  attempted  in  Rome. 

Septennate  and  Indebtedness. 

Did  the  Year  of  Release  actually  release  the  debtor 
definitely  and  fully?  Or,  rather,  was  the  Seventh  Year  but 
a  suspense  of  debts,  a  year  of  grace,  a  patient  waiting,  the 
debtor  having  to  pay  thereafter  ?  Commentators  and  econo- 
mists  are  divided  thereupon.  Some  take  the  Release  Year, 
^^ Shemitta,''  and  its  root,  "  Shamot,"  to  express  but  a  stay  of 
debts,  meaning-  that  during  that  year  no  debtor  could  be 
prosecuted,  analogous  to  the  modern  Sunday  privilege, 
leaving  on  Monday  the  debt  perfectly  valid.  They  find  the 
idea  absurd  that  a  practical  lawgiver  ever  could  have 
imagined  the  extinction  of  all  debts  at  each  seventh  year. 
That  would  destroy  all  business  and  all  confidence  and  all 
industry  (See  Michaelis).  ^^^  Carefully  surveying  all  the  pas- 
sages bearing  on  that,  pondering  over  them  in  connection 
with  the  contemporaneous  circumstances  of  ancient  Canaan, 
keeping  in  mind  the  leading  aims  of  the  Mosaic  law,  I 
think  that  the  traditional  conception  of  the  Release- Year 
to  really  mean  a  total  and  absolute  extinction  of  all  pecu- 
niary debts,  is  the  correct  one. 

We  must,  namely,  judge  an  ancient  author  by  his  stand- 
ard, not  by  ours.  We,  now,  give  to  industry  and  initiative, 
to  the  desire  of  enrichment  and  enterprise  all  possible 
impetus,  freedom  and  encouragement.  This  is  our,  modern, 
way  of  understanding  freedom  and  happiness.  If  well 
applied  or  not,  that  is  another  question.  The  Mosaic  law- 
giver had  another  ideal  before  his  eyes.  His  ideal  was  not 
a  rich,  luxurious,  competitive,  conquering,  encroaching 
nation,  filling  the  world  with  its  arms,  its  glory,  its  luxury, 
its  edifices  and  its  monuments,  as  the  Assyrians  or  the  Athe- 
nians tried  or   realized.     No,  his  model  was  rather  nearer 

(1)  Cesetzg-ebung  Mosis  ad  locum. 


88  SPIRIT   OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

that  of  Lycurgus,  than  that  of  Raamses,  Herod,  or  Louis 
XIV,  each  surnamed  The  Great-,  with  that  difference,  that 
he   aimed  not   simply  at   strength  and   endurance   as   the 
Spartan  lawgiver,  but  at  moral  greatness,  at  perfection  and 
holiness  (11.  M.  19,  6.)     Therefore,  he  discouraged  conquests 
and  war,  great  and  luxurious  industries  and  enriching  com- 
merce.    He  aimed  really  at  a  "  kingdom  of  priests  and  holy 
nation,'^  humble  and  meek  and  paciiic ;  fulfilling  the  law, 
kind  to  each  other,  keeping  their  own  and  not  encroaching 
upon  other  nations,  remaining  obscure,  modest,  poor ;  but 
sound,  hale,  pure,  and  thus,  really  happy.     This  political 
and  ethical   ideal   is  at  the  base  of  the   Pentateuch.     The 
later  prophets  constantly  point  to  it  and  lead  the  nation 
back  to  it ;  with  all  the  fire  of  their  enthusiasm,  and  with  the 
warm  heart  of  patriots  they  oppose  the  vain  and  glittering 
schemes  of  Jerohoaia  and  Ahdb.     With  the  rising  of  the 
great  empires,  Assyria,  Media,  Babylonia,  Persia,  etc.,  that 
ideal   appears   to   have   been   totally   lost  sight    of.     The 
Great  kings  of  those  countries  aimed  at  universal  empires, 
and  conquests,  huge  armies,  centralization,  splendid  monu- 
mental structures,  immortalizing  their  fame,  and  eternizing 
their   dynasties  and  their  names.     The  ^ilosaic  ideal  of  a 
people's   happiness   and   endurance,  can   therefore   not   be 
much  younger  than  three  thousand  years.     Later,  that  ideal 
was  supplanted  by  sterner,   coarser  realities.     Later   con- 
querors and  politicians  realized  that  ^'hammer  or  anvil^^ 
is  the  lot  of  nations,  and  that  in  order  not  to  be  subjugated, 
a  people  must  subjugate  others.     This  is  no  doubt  a  sad  sort 
of  political  wisdom,  but  it  is  one  in  a  certain  state  of  society, 
especially  a  young,  inexperienced  one,  as  were  those  of  the 
biblical  times,  comparatively.     This  is  one  of  the  many 
reasons,  why  the  bulk  of  the  Pentateuch  must  belong  to  a 
higher   antiquity  than   often   accepted   by  certain   critics. 
The  practical,  good  sense  of  the  ]\fosaic  legislator  can  not 
be  questioned.     Yet  by  the  time  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah, 


DEBTORS    IN     ROME    AND    JUD.EA.  8^ 

600  and  800  B.  Ch.,  that  ideal  was  already  superseded. 
Hence  must  that  Mosaic  state-polity,  of  modest  law-abiding 
peace  and  justice-loving  national  life,  without  war,  com- 
merce, great  industries,  wealth  and  luxuries, — that  must  be 
of  a  more  hoary  antiquity. 

State  Polity  and  Economy  of  the  Bible. 

Thus  the  biblical  laws  enjoined:  Do  not  sell  your 
inherited  family-acre.  Do  not  enslave  your  persons.  In 
distress,  liire  out  for  six  years'  labor.  Do  not  lend  money 
or  goods  on  interest  or  profit.  A  loan  was  to  be  half  and 
half  a  charity.  You  need  no  marble  houses  nor  coach  and 
livery.  Therefore,  give  of  your  superfluity  to  your  poorer 
neighbor  lacking  bread,  and  God  will  bless  you  for  it; 
Every  seventh  day  take  a  rest  for  thee,  thy  servant, 
stranger  and  cattle.  Every  seventh  year  keep  an  agrarian 
Sabbath  for  man,  beast  and  the  soil,  too,  all  needing  it. 
Every  seventh  year  the  Ebrew  slave  goes  out  free,  or  the 
rogue  shall  be  bored  in  the  ear.  Every  septennate  the  bond- 
age of  debts  shall  be  cancelled,  debts  being  the  worst 
slavery.  Half  the  poor  in  ancient  States  fell  into  slavery 
from  non-payment  of  their  debts,  as  chattels  of  creditors. 
Ancient,  powerful  Rome,  mistress  of  the  world,  was  many 
times  on  the  brink  of  revolution  and  collapse,  yea,  of  total 
ruination,  from  that  cause. 

Debtors  in  Rome  and  Jud.ea. 

The  gi-eat  civil  commotions  in  the  times  of  the  Gracchi, 
Sylla  and  Ma.rius,  Caesar  and  Pompeius,  etc.,  were  largely 
brought  about  by  the  mutiny  of  the  debtors  against  their 
cruel  creditors.  In  his  second  oration  against  Catiline, 
Cicero  alludes  to  that  important  fact  again  and  again,  as  one 
of  the  principal  sources  of  Rome's  social  embarrassments. 
''  Do  you  expect  war  ?  Will  your  possessions  be  spared  in  the 
general   devastation?     Or   do   you   wish   the   abolition   of 


^0  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

debts? — an  tabulas  novas?  Errant  qui  istas  a  Catilina 
expectant.  They  who  expect  it  from  Catiline  are  in  errror."— 
Catiline,  and  later,  C?esar,  were  popular,  holding  out  the  hope 
of  debt-abolition.  "  The  very  first  class  (of  Catiline's  sup- 
porters) are  great  nobles  deeply  in  debt,  and  not  wishing  to 
pay  them,"  says  Cicero.  "  Unus  genus  est  eorum  qui  magno 
in  aere  alieno,  .  .  .  quarum  dissolm  nullo  modo  pos- 
sunt"  (Oratio  11.  in  Catilinam,  100.)— Moses  discouraged 
the  accumulation  of  debts  by  interest  or  speculation,  check- 
ing that  tremendous  avidity  for  accap^ara^mp' and  grasping, 
the  leading  features  and  the  curse  of  old  and  of  modern 
nations.  In  a  society  constituted  after  the  pattern  of  the 
Bible,  one  would  entertain  no  fear  of  communism,  anarchy 
and  dynamite.  Indeed,  the  Mosaic  polity  contains  probably 
everything  rational  and  safe  in  socialism,  expunging  all  its 
crudities.  Look  close  to  these  verses  (V.  M.  15,  1):  "At  the 
end  of  six  years  let  there  be  a  release  iShemitta),  namely: 
Every  creditor  shall  release  his  debtor  from  his  indebted- 
ness, and  not  press  his  neighbor  and  brother,  for  it  is  a  release 
to  the  Eternal.  The  foreigner  (in  his  own  country)  thou 
mayest  press  for  payment,  but  he  living  with  thee,  thy 
brother,  take  off  thy  hand  from  him,  that  there  shall  be  no 
pauper  among  you,  and  God  will  bless  thee.  He  who  gave 
thee  an  inheritance  in  possession.  When,  nevertheless, 
there  will  be  a  poor  one  in  thy  city,  do  not  harden  thy 
heart,  nor  close  thy  hand  against  thy  brother,  the  poor  one. 
Should  thy  wicked  heart  think,  the  release-year  is  near, 
and  thou  wouldst  give  him  nothing;  that  would  be  mean. 
Indeed,  open  thy  hand  to  thy  poor  brother,  and  God 
will  bless  thee  in  all  thy  doings."  That  sounds  by  all 
means,  if  not  as  a  peremptory  command,  at  least  as  a  strong 
recommendation  to  abandon  and  annul  all  debts  in  the 
seventh  year.  The  passage  following  is  to  the  same  point 
(V.  M.  15,  12):  ''An  Ebrew,  being  sold  to  thee,  .^hall  work 
six  years;  in  the  seventh  he  shall  be  free.     And  when  leav- 


PRESENT    AND    ANCIENT    ECONOMICS.  91 

ing  thee,  let  him  have  a  portion,  according  to  the  wealth  God 
blessed  thee  with.  For  a  slave  thou  hast  been  in  Egypt,  and 
God  has  redeemed  thee."  I  think,  therefore,  to  be  nearer  the 
truth  in  siding  with  the  Rabbinical  interpretation,  that  the 
year  of  release  meant  a  complete  cancellation  and  abandon- 
ment of  all  pecuniary  debts.  It  was,  namely,  a  sub-division 
and  auxiliary  of  the  Jubilee.  Every  seventh  year  debts  were 
extinguished  and  slaves  set  free.  Every  fifty  years  there 
was  a  total  renovation  and  restoration  of  the  entire  Judaean 
society  and  a  return  to  its  pristine  condition.  Let  us  not 
forget  the  difference  of  times  and  circumstances. 

Present  and  Ancient  Economics. 

In  our  present  era  of  fierce  competition,  selfish  individual 
efforts  and  unbridled  acquisition,  such  a  law  would  be  tan- 
tamount to  communism  and  confiscation  of  property.  All 
commerce  and  trade  would  come  to  a  stand-still,  and  society 
would  celebrate  an  involuntary  and  uninterrupted  holiday; 
work  would  be  stopped  and  starvation  might  follow.  Not 
so  in  ancient  Ebrew  Canaan,  the  scene  of  that  legislation. 
Imagine  Sparta,  clinging  yet  to  the  letter  and  spirit  of 
the  Lycurgian  laws,  and  before  its  days  of  corruption  by 
conquest,  would  enact  such  statutes  of  Release  and  Jubilee, 
there  would  not  result  the  least  social  disturbance.  Just  so 
it  was  in  Judsea,  with  a  tolerable  equality  of  property  and 
political  status,  with  little  wealth,  industry  and  commerce, 
a  modest  nation  given  to  agriculture  and  a  simple  mode  of 
life;  that  could  have  no  other  effect  than  to  uphold  the 
original  scheme  of  the  legislator.  This  aim  was  the  found- 
ing of  a  State  and  of  a  people  for  absolute  freedom  and  full 
equality,  frugal  and  sober,  strong  enough  to  repel  invasion, 
too  weak  to  encroach  upon  the  neighbors,  having  little  inter- 
course with  other  nations,  the  lawgiver  deprecating  amal- 
gamation, having  placed  his  God-idea  and  purity  of  morals 
as  frhe  corner-stone  of  his  State,  so  much  in  contrast  with 


92  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  neigliboring  tribes,  worsliiping  Baal,  Moloch  and 
Astaroth.  The  metliod  of  Moses  is  more  congenial  to  our 
modern  taste  than  that  of  Lycurgus.  The  latter  sacrificed 
everything,  even  property,  morals,  nature  and  family,  to 
secure  the  existence  of  the  State.  Moses  secured  the  State, 
while  yet  upholding  all  these ;  remaining  true  to  nature ; 
the  family  was  dear  and  sacred  to  him ;  so  was  property,  so 
filial  piety,  chastity,  ethics  and  all  the  instincts  of  nature. 
Nevertheless  did  he  keep  in  bounds  fierce  avarice,  competi- 
tion, plutocracy  and  pauperism,  building  up  human  holiness 
upon  the  ''7ioly  God""  principle. 

The  Number  Seven. 

Why  did  the  legislator  take  the  number  seven  as  his 
norm  ?  To  the  supernatural  import  thereof  I  have  nothing 
to  add;  that  is  well  known.  It  is  the  seven-days  creation 
doctrine.  Critically  considered,  it  appears  to  recall  the 
ancient  view  of  the  solar  system  of  the  universe,  with  its 
seven  heavenly  bodies;  hence,  the  sacredness  of  the 
number  seven.  Seven  in  Ebrew  "  8heh7ia,^^  is  the  root 
of  87iel)iah,  meaning  swearing,  taking  an  oath ;  as  in 
English,  seven  and  swear,  or  affirming  by  the  seven 
heavenly  bodies.  Thus,  there  are  six  days  of  creation,  and 
the  seventli  is  a  "Sabbath,"  consecrated.  The  seventh  month 
is  the  holiday  month.  By  seven  were  computed  the  cycles 
of  time.  Release  Year  and  Jubilee.  At  the  completion  of 
that  cycle,  the  return  of  slaves  and  of  their  property  to 
their  original  status  was  proclaimed.  The  ten  days  before 
the  atonement  day  were  given  free  to  the  slaves,  who  then 
appeared  in  wreaths,  as  the  equals  of  their  masters,  recall- 
ing the  natural  state  of  man.  (^)  Later,  by  the  Rabbis, 
these  ten  days  were  turned  to  moral  account — liberation 
from  sin — called  "  Ten  Days  of  Repentance."  Seven  days 
yearly  are  biblical  holidays.     The  seventh  year  again  is  the 

(1)    Maimonides,  I'tuL  Releases  and  Jubilee.  \ 


IS    SEPTENNATE    A    FACT.  93 

holy  rest,  without  any  agrarian  work,  as  tilling,  sowing  and 
reaping,  for  the  soil,  too,  needs  a  rest.  Its  spontaneous 
produce  belongs  to  every  one,  tlius  again  remembering  the 
original  state  of  natural  society,  when  the  soil  belonged 
to  every  one.  After  seven  times  seven  years,  the  fiftieth 
year  is  the  grand  Jubilee,  where  everything  and  every  man 
returned  tO  their  original  condition,  without  any  artificial 
dislocation  of  man  and  matter. 

Is  Septennate  a  Fact? 

Were  those  institutions,  the  Sabbatical  year  and  the 
Jubilee,  really  facts,  laws  realized  in  practical  life,  or  simple 
theories,  ideas,  desirable  suggestions?  Here  we  must  dis- 
criminate. During  the  whole  course  of  the  first  period  of 
Ebrew  hi  story,  from  Moses  to  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  it  appears 
they  were  much  neglected,  if  not  totally  ignored ;  as,  indeed, 
most  of  the  Mosaic  legislation  was;  as  even  the  leading 
doctrine  of  Monotheism  was,  the  prophetic  school  alone 
entertaining  the  tiacred  hearth  of  nationality  and  pure  wor- 
ship. The  mass  of  the  people,  with  the  princes  at  their 
head,  were  given  to  the  surrounding  idolatries.  During  that 
long  period,  the  Jubilee  and  Release  year  were  at  the  utmost, 
Ideals  a.nd  pious  wishes,  not  general  facts.  So  we  find 
Jeremiah  remonstrating  with  the  nobles  against  their 
detaining  Ebrew  slaves.  His  denunciations  (34,  8)  of  king 
and  princes  are  bold,  vehement  and  sweeping.  So  do  we 
read  of  the  poor  woman,  complaining  to  the  i^rophet  about 
her  creditors,  having  taken  away  her  children  in  payment 
of  debts, — utterly  contrary  to  the  biblical  law.  Isaiah 
(61,  1)  and  Ezekiel  (46,  17,  etc.),  to  all  appearances,  allude  to 
it  as  a  philanthropic  ideal.  Another  solid  hint  that  that 
vast  and  far-reaching  institution  was  but  a  pious  wish,  do 
we  already  find  in  III.  M.  26;  in  that  severe  and  gloomy 
chapter,  delineating  the  infidelity  of  Israel  and  its  grave 
national  consequences. 


94  spirit  of  the  biblical  legislatiox. 

Evidence  Thereof. 

There  tlie  sacred  orator  denounces  in  a  severe,  scathing^ 
long  passage  the  grievous  sin  of  having  neglected  the  insti- 
tution in  question  (ibid  26,  33) :  "  I  shall  scatter  you  among 
the  barbarians,  unsheathing  my  sword  after  you  and  destroy- 
ing your  cities.  Then  will  the  land  make  good  its  Sabbaths 
(time  of  rest  or  Release-years).  As  long  as  you  stay  among 
your  enemies,  the  land  will  make  good  its  Sabbath-rest— a 
bitter  irony! — since  it  did  not  rest  during  your  dwelling 
thereon." — According  to  Isaiah  V,  8,  and  Michah  II,  2,  the 
poor  man's  family-lot  often  was  remorselessly  appropriated 
by  the  strong.— II.  Chronicles  36,  21,  alludes  to  III.  M.  26,  34, 
apparently.  Wonderful,  he  ascribes  it  to  Jeremiah  and  in 
nearly  the  identical  words.  May  be  that  Jeremiah,  too, 
contained  that  allusion  to  our  passage,  which  in  our  version, 
now,  is  omitted.  It  reads  verbatim  :  "  The  remnants  of  the 
sword  he  exiled  into  JBabylon  to  fulfill  the  word  of  God 
to  Jeremiah  :  Until  the  land  will  make  good  its  Sabbaths 
during  all  the  days  of  its  being  deserted,  it  will  rest  to 
complete  seventy  years."  Of  course  the  bold  critic  would 
conclude  from  that  utterance  of  Chronicles  that  III.  M.  26, 
31  to  36,  has  been  written  by  Jeremiah.  I  believe  that 
assumption  not  to  be  necessary. 

With  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  the  restorers  of  the  Mosaic 
polity,  the  Jubilee  and  Sabbath  year  were,  it  appears, 
reinstated.  In  a  solemn  convention  of  the  Ebrew  Estates^ 
(Nehemiah  10,  1,  etc.),  they  wrote  and  signed  a  solemn 
compact  to  abide  by  the  Law  of  God,  they  and  their  fami- 
lies, and  affirmed  upon  oath  to  walk  after  that  doctrine  as 
taught  by  Moses,  etc.,  not  to  inter-marry  with  the  Heathen 
Gentiles  nor  to  buy  anything  on  the  Sabbath  and  holy 
days,  and  to  forego  [work)  on  the  seventh  year  and  remit 
all  indebtedness,  etc.,  etc.  Thus  we  see  here  that  in  the 
sacred  pact  of   the  national  convention  under  Nehemiah, 


EVIDENCE   THEREOF.  95 

the  law  concerning  the'  Release-year,  in  its  two  leading 
features,  viz.:  no  tilling  of  soil  and  cancelling  of  debts  was  sol- 
emnly instituted  and  declared  valid.  In  I.  Maccabeans,  VI. 
49,  we  read  expressly:  "And  they,  (the  Judaeans),  left  the 
city,  (Baith  Zur),  for  they  had  no  provisions  to  stand  any 
longer  the  siege.  Because  there  was  the  year  of  rest  in. 
the  land."  And  Ibidem,  verse  53  :  "  They,  (the  Jews),  had 
no  provisions  in  their  vessels,  since  it  was  the  senetdh  year, 
and  those  who  had  fled  to  Judaea  from  the  Heathens,  had 
consumed  all  their  provisions." 

This  can  mean  nothing  else  but  the  Mosaic  Year  of 
Release.  Further,  do  we  read  in  Josephus  (Antiquib.  XIII, 
8,  1):  "As  the  siege  was  drawn  out  into  length  by  this 
means,  that  year  on  which  the  Jews  use  to  rest,  came  on, 
for  the  Jews  observe  this  rest  every  seventh  year,  as  they 
do  every  seventh  day;"  and  Ibidem  XIV,  10,  6,  we  read: 
"  Caius  Caesar,  imperator,  for  the  second  time,  hath  ordained 
that  all  the  country  of  the  Jews,  excepting  Joppa,  do  pay  a 
tribute  yearly  for  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  excepting  the 
seventh  year,  whicli  they  call  the  Sabbatic  Year,  because 
thereon  they  neither  gather  the  fruits  of  their  trees  nor  do 
they  sow  their  lands." — The  same  Josephus  mentions  it  in 
many  other  places — ibid.  16, 12, 15,  and  Jewish  Wars,  1,  2, 4. — 
So  Tacitus'  History,  5,  4 :  "  The  seventh  day  they  give  to 
rest,  the  seventh  year  to  laziness."  (^)  That  this  Sabbatic 
institution  was  a  practical  one,  is  proven  too  by  the  fact  that 
the  Rabbis  elaborated  that  system  with  all  their  wonted 
minuteness  and  exactness  in  Mishna,  Talmud  and  Casuists. 
(See  Talmud,  Bably.,  Schebiith  and  Maimonides,  "  Release 
and  Jubilee,"  chapter  X,  3.) 

According  to  tradition,  there  were  seventeen  plus  eight 
Jubilee  cycles  celebrated,  since  the  Ebrew  occupation  of 

(1)  Septimo  die  otium  placuisse  ferunt;  quia  is  finem  laborum  tulerit;  dein  blan- 
diente  inertia  septimum  quoQue  annum  ignavi.e  datum. 

Tacitus  knew  little  of  the  facts  and  less  of  the  spirit  of  Mosaism,  destined  to  reiga 
even  in  Rome  hoi'self . 


96 


SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 


Palestine  until  Ezra  and  the  diaspora.  I,  therefore,  do 
not  in  tlie  least  doubt  tliat  tliese  institutions  were 
intended  as  actual  facts  and  positive  laws,  commanded, 
and,  at  least  during  the  II  temple,  really  practiced.  But 
I  think  they  never  were  realized  in  their  full  sense  and 
entire  essence.  I  think  rather,  as  with  many  other  Mosaic 
ordinances,  they  were  buried  under  the  mass  of  Kabbini- 
cal  traditions,  the  law  was  kept  in  letter,  but  changed 
materially  in  spirit,  whenever  the  original  spirit  no 
longer  was  believed  to  be  the  "spirit  of  the  times;"  a 
method  followed  by  Mishna  and  Talmud,  as  also  in  later 
times.  A  proof  thereof  is  the  Rabbinical  arrangement  of 
Pros-houly  or  Reservation.  (^)  (Maim.  Yad.  on  Release  and 
Jubilee  IX,  16.)  Namely,  as  the  Mosaic  code  required  the 
relinquishment  of  all  debts  every  seventh  year,  and  as 
towards  the  latter  part  of  the  II  Ebrew  Commonwealth  the 
Judseans,  especially  those  living  in  foreign  countries,  had 
adopted  largely  mercantile  pursuits,  the  release  of  indebt- 
edness proved  to  be  simply  ruinous.  Now  there  is  a  maxim 
in  Jewish  jurisprudence,  that  a  law  is  intended  to  be  useful 
and  beneficial,  ('-)  not  detrimental,  as  long  as  it  is  to  remain 
in  force;  and  that  when  it  becomes  obnoxious  to  the 
majority  f )  it  must  be  abolished. 

Abolition  of   Septennate. 

Even  so  did  Hillel  and  the  leading  authorities  act  in  that 
instance.  They  abrogated  it,  because  "Judsea  was  no  longer 
independent."  They  formulated  a  legal  deed  by  which  the 
debt  and  the  right  of  collecting  it  at  any  time,  except  the 
Release-year,  was  reserved  to  the  creditor,  and  then  the 
Septennate  was  reduced  simply  to  a  postponement  of  pay- 
ment, as  it  is  even  now  interpreted  by  many  jurists,  as 
Michaelis  and  others. 

•^ums   (1) 

•  Dna  nio'^E^'  n^i  ."Dnn  ^m,,   (2) 

•n  niDv!?  p^i3'  jrx  iiTvn  nn   (3) 


SEPTENNATE   NEVER   TRIED.  97 

The  interesting  passage  thereon  is  in  Talmud  Bably. 
Shehiith,  10:  "The  Pros-hoiily  act  saves  the  debt  from 
cancellation.  This  is  one  of  the  arrangements  of  Hillel  the 
Elder,  seeing  the  people's  hesitation  in  lending  money.'' 
(^)  By  a  similar  legal  fiction  the  later  Rabbis  allowed  to 
take  interest  on  money,  contrary  to  the  express  Mosaic  law, 
by  a  deed  declaring  the  creditor  a  partner  of  the  debtor, 
with  a  ri^ht  to  share  in  the  profits  of  the  business  for 
which  he  is  lending  the  money,  at  the  same  time  intimat- 
ing that  he  is  relinquishing  that  profit  for  a  percentage  on 
the  capital.  Even  so,  no  doubt,  did  the  Rabbinical  sages 
deal  with  all  the  features  of  that  far-reaching  institution, 
originally  intended  for  a  small  agricultural,  isolated  people 
in  hoary  times  and  primitive  surroundings,  but  altogether 
out  of  harmony  with  the  Ebrew  development  fifteen  cen- 
turies afterwards. 

Septeis'nate  Never  Tried. 

We  can,  therefore,  not  say  that  this  institution  ever  had 
a  fair  trial,  nor  do  I  believe  that  we  can  actually  have  an 
estimate  of  its  bearings  in  real  life.  I  presume  that  this 
far-reaching  institution,  of  the  utmost  import  to  the  econom- 
ical, political  and  social  development  of  a  people,  though 
formally  kept  up  in  puny  Judaea  during  its  second  histori- 
cal period,  is  yet,  in  truth  and  reality,  a  terra  incognita. 
We  cannot  judge  of  its  grand  results,  what  it  might  be  . 
when  fully  in  practice,  for  a  long  period  of  time,  on  a  large 
scale,  realized  in.  essence  and  in  spirit,  and  supervised  by 
statesmen  and  wise  economists.  I  think  it  worth  while  for 
philosophers  and  philanthropists  to  take  it  into  the  most 
earnest  consideration.  It  strikes  my  mind  that  it  can  not 
be  accidental  that  so  many  of  the  leading  scientists  and 
systematizers  of  modern   social   democracy  are  of   Ebrew 

■  nr  nx  m  nii^nisD  nyn  pyjojcj* 

7 


98  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

origin.  I  mean,  in  the  first  place,  Karl  Marx.  So,  too,  are 
next  Lasalle,  Singer,  Bamberger,  Dr.  Max  Hirsh,  etc.  Even 
others,  as  St.  Simon  and  Prudhon,  the  French  social  initi- 
ators, have  drawn  their  sympathies  and  ideas  from  that 
same  fountain,  the  Mosaic  aspirations,  to  base  the  State, 
not  simply  upon  personal  liberty  and  political  equality,  but 
going  deeper,  upon  a  comparative  sameness  of  property,  an 
equal  distribution  of  wealth,  a  system  compounded  of 
property  and  community,  of  individualism  and  socialism, 
of  supremacy  of  the  citizen  and  that  of  the  State,  a  com- 
munism combined  with  full  individual  initiative,  so  unlike 
modern  communism,  and  as  unlike  that  of  Lycurgus  and 
Sparta.  As  so  many  other  great  thoughts,  so  social  demo- 
cracy, too,  may  be  but  a  recent  revival  of  a  biblical  idea.  I 
think  economists  have  only  to  dig  in  that  antique  gold  mine, 
and  they  will  find  there  more  genuine  treasures  than  in 
all  the  finds  of  Babylon  and  Greece. 

Septennatp:  and   Modern  Charity. 

Mutilated  and  curtailed  as  the  Jubilee  and  Release-year 
have  been  realized,  their  influence  upon  the  character  of 
modern  nations  is,  nevertheless,  potent  and  vast.  Their 
political  and  social  benefactions  have  been  greatly  frus- 
trated by  legal  fictions,  downright  misunderstanding  and 
misapplication.  An  equality  of  wealth  they  have  not 
brought  about,  because  they  were  never  fairly  tried.  Never- 
theless, they  have  realized  practical,  grand  results  of  a 
moral  nature.  That  sensibility,  sympathy  and  fellow-feeling 
in  the  modern  man's  temperament  are  undoubtedly  their 
effects.  Those  biblical  charity-laws  of  which  I  shall  treat 
soon,  are  their  logical  outcome.  That  Israelites  are  pro- 
verbially charitable,  (^)  that  organized  sympathy  exists 
among  modern  nations  in  Europe  and  America,  that  charity 
is   a   leading  feature   in   the   New  Testament   and  in   the 


EXEMPTION    LAWS    AND    FRAUD.  99 

Koran,  all  this  re-echoes  the  great  heart  of  the  author 
of  the  Septennate  system.  The  modern  all-pervading 
idea  that  active  goodness  and  philanthropy  are  the  very 
marrow  and  essence  of  religion,  standing  out  in  relief 
before  and  above  dogma  and  race  and  class-interest,  filling 
the  heart  of  enlightened  Christian,  Jew  and  Heathen,  that 
idea  is  hewn  fro'm  the  great  quarry  of  the  Mosaic,  humani- 
tarian legislation.  The  New  Testament  is  brimful  of  it ; 
it  starts  with  a  communistic  society  ;  it  declares  the  King- 
dom of  Heaven  especially  belonging  to  the  poor;  it  asks 
of  the  rich  "  to  give  away  all,  if  he  desires  to  enter  that 
kingdom."  The  Koran  did  not  remain  far  behind  in  that 
respect,  holding  to  the  identical  sujjreme  idea  of  love  to 
man.  As  the  Sabbath,  the  means  of  educating,  elevating 
and  sanctifying  man,  originated  in  the  Bible,  expanded 
in  the  vast  Christian  world  and  then  in  the  vaster  Mahom- 
medan  one,  encompassing  now  the  civilized  portion  of  man- 
kind; even  so  may  its  perfect  development,  the  Insti- 
tution of  the  seven-years'-cycle,  become  the  panacea  against 
our  great  social  evils,  the  solution  of  the  "social  ques- 
tion," the  remedy  against  proletarianism,  pauperism  and 
plutocracy. 

Exemption  Laws  and  Fraud. 

That  Institution  has,  besides  the  above-mentioned  politico- 
social  purposes,  also  a  legislative  one.  It  is  the  bankruptcy 
and  exemption  law  of  ancient  times.  Nearly  every  modern 
statute  book  has  enacted  some  provisions  against  totally 
depriving  a  man  of  all  means  of  subsistence  in  case  of  mis- 
fortune. Some  leave  a  certain  allowance  in  goods  for  him- 
self and  his  family;  some,  his  homestead;  some,  his  furni- 
ture and  clothing;  some,  his  life-insurance;  some,  the 
dower  brought  in  by  his  wife,  etc.,  etc.  Now  behold  the 
abuse  of  such  exemption  laws.  Here  is  a  merchant,  living 
extravagantly,  out-doing  and  out-shining  all  his  neighbors. 


100  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

To  cover  up  such  display,  lie  must  over-speculate  and  under- 
sell. To  hide  that,  he  falsifies  his  books. — Even  his  clerks 
are  kept  in  the  dark. — Even  his  books  are  made,  to  hide  the 
truth.  He  never  was  a  friend  of  honest  double-entry  book- 
keeping. He  had  his  own  crooked  ways  of  keeping  accounts. 
As  the  Holy  of  Holies  of  old,  his  personal  stock-account 
was  shrouded  in  darkness,  his  bookkeeper  n^ever  approached 
it  without  trembling.  A  crisis  comes  on,  failure  sets  in, 
and  there  is  a  woeful  deficit. — But  his  lady  is  so  charming ; 
he  was  so  hospitable;  she  gave  such  fine  dinner-parties  and 
musical  soirees.  "'Society ^^  the  courts,  the  creditors  them- 
selves, sympathize  with  him  and  her.  They  can't  endure 
the  thought  that  such  people  should  leave  the  brown  stone 
house  and  the  diamonds.  The  exemption  laws  are  twisted 
and  tortured  in  their  favor,  and  a  compromise  of  twenty- 
five  cents  on  the  dollar  is  effected. 

Here,  again,  is  a  modest  man,  living  humbly,  keeping  a 
small  store,  with  a  large  family  behind  him.  He  is  crushed 
by  competition ;  he  has  but  few  customers ;  his  goods  are 
depreciated  by  going  out  of  fashion,  and  he  suspends  pay- 
ment.— Little  sympathy  is  there  for  him.  The  sheriff  sells 
his  humble  stock  under  the  hammer,  at  thirty  cents  on  the 
dollar.  His  creditors  lose  and  are  furious;  nobody  has  a 
good  word  for  the  fellow;  and  he  and  his  family  are  forever 
ruined  and  forever  bankrupt.  Now,  where  is  here  justice  ? 
Is  not  justice  here  a  mockery!  The  extravagant  and  fash- 
ionable are  exempted.  The  modest,  the  honest,  the  thrifty, 
ruined  by  reckless,  soulless  competition — they  are  sent  to 
the  poor-house. 

Code  Napoleon. 

When  the  famous  Code  Napoleon  was  prepared,  at  the 
dawn  of  this  century,  by  the  French  Council  of  State,  such 
exemption  laws  were  proposed  in  favor  of  the  wife  of  the 
bankrupt.    With  his  usual  good  common  sense.  Napoleon  I. 


RESUME  OF  JUBILEE  AND  SEPTENNATE.         101 

argued  the  case  as  just  set  forth,  viz:  "That  display  and 
diamonds  are  mostly  at  the  bottom  of  failures,  and  that 
the  sin  must  be  laid  at  the  door  of  the  sinner  proper,  with- 
out distinction  of  sex." — The  Bible  is  eminently  just  in  its 
exemption  laws. — No  man  shall  be  born  to  absolute  pov- 
erty. Everyone  is  possessed  of  his  family  lot.  In  marry- 
ing he  has  some  speck  of  ground  to  rely  upon  as  a  last 
resort.  He  enjoys  its  fruit.  He  cannot  alienate  it.  It  is 
the  leaning  staff  of  his  widow  and  his  children.  It  cannot 
be  wrested  from  liim  by  debt.  It  is  inalienable.  In  our 
times  people  marry  on  air,  pay  the  last  hundred  dollars  for 
a  bridal  present,  begin  business  on  air  and  moonshine,  and 
rely  on  exemption  laws  and  "  stolen  sympathies."  Could 
we  not  learn  here,  too,  from  the  wisdom  of  the  ancient 
lawgiver? — A  hundred  times  he  warns  against  wronging 
widows  and  orphans.  He  forbids  to  take  a  pawn  of  a 
widow, — to  take  away  the  "  simla"  or  shawl  used  in  time  of 
night.  God  is  the  special  protector  of  the  widows  and 
orphans.  A  portion  of  the  crop  is  theirs.  But  she  is  not 
exempt  from  the  law  of  responsibility.  Again,  we  must  not 
forget  that  tlie  status  of  woman  now,  and  once,  is  immensely 
different.  Anciently,  she  was  sold  into  marriage ;  she  had 
little  or  no  cboice  of  her  lord.  He  was  entitled  to  have 
several  marital  establishments.  Hence,  often  could  he 
ruin  the  family  without  her  concurrence,  even  against  her 
will.  Now  it  is  the  wife  who  is  mostly  the  mistress  of  the 
house,  who  arranges  her  household  and  its  expenses,  who 
has  her  full  share  of  its  enjoyments.  She  can  coerce, 
restrain  or  destroy.  Hence,  she  must  be  responsible. 
"'  Nobility  obliges." 

Resume  on  Jubilee  and  Septennate. 

The  biblical  passages  on  the  above  institutions  are: 
II.  M.  23,  10— III.  M.  25— V.  M.  15,  and  many,  many  more. 
The  import  of  the  institution  is  a  restoration  of  man  and 


102  SPIRIT   OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

soil  to  their  natural  and  original  conditions.  Originally, 
botli  were  free.  Social  and  economic  alterations  changed 
that  status,  and  both  were  enslaved.  The  lawgiver  estab- 
lished the  seventh  year  cycle  for  the  freedom  of  persons 
and  of  soil,  and  the  Jubilee  as  a  total  restoration  of  society  to 
the  original  state,  a  restitutio  in  integrum.  It  is  realizing 
thus  the  ideas  of  ''Mine  are  Israel,  devoted  to  Jahveh's 
service,  by  Him  redeemed  from  Egypt,"  and  "  Mine  is  the 
land;  ye  shall  not  sell  it  for  ever. — Ye  are  but  my  tenants." 
— Now  these  are,  closely  seen,  the  views  of  modern  democ- 
racy, those,  especially,  pervading  modern  socialism.  Man 
and  soil  are  absolutely  free,  the  property  of  the  entire 
society,  not  of  king  or  class.  Mosaism  thus  has  happily 
compromised  between  property  and  community,  individ- 
ualism and  communism,  consecrating  the  first,  yet  con- 
stantly remembering  the  latter:  "Ye  were  slaves  in 
Egypt."  That  means,  poor  ye  were  and  oppressed.  Hence, 
learn  to  live  and  let  live;  be  no  oppressors  in  your  turn,  no 
plutocracy,  no  landlordism  and  no  proletarianism. 

The  remission  of  debts  in  the  seventh  year  is  absolute,  a 
relinquishing  and  total  cancellation  thereof.  It  is  not 
simply  a  suspension  during  the  Sabbatic  year,  as  believed 
by  Keil  and  Michaelis.  Such  is  the  sense  of  the  Septua- 
ginta  (Deut.  15,  1.)  (')  The  same  is  the  opinion  of  Philo 
(M.  II.,  277.)  The  same,  originally  in  the  Talmud  (Shebiith 
10,  1),  declaring  without  any  discussion  or  doubt  that  f) 
"  the  seventh  year  cancels  and  releases  from  all  indebted- 
ness, with  or  without  a  legal  deed."  The  Rabbis  go  to  the 
very  extreme,  declaring  that  "  even  the  hireling's  wages  are 
forfeited  when  left  as  a  loan  to  the  employer."  Later, 
exceptions  began  to  crop  up.     No  doubt  this  took  place 

(1).  Ai  krcra  iruv  Trou'/aei^  CKptatVj  kcu  ovtcj  tu  TrpocTay/ui  rf/r  a(j>tagij)Q.  aor/ceic  ttHv 
Xpio(;'i6ioVj  b  dfei?.ei  aoi  6  rr?.7/c/ov^  aal  top  cuhAipov  aov  o'vk  cnrairijatig.  hTiiKtKATjrai  jap 
acpeoLq  /ityjiw  rcJ  ^eiJ  aov. 

."ictja  vh^"\  nt2L"3  ,m^on  riN  nD»L"D  n^r^c*   (2) 


RESUME   OF   JUBILEE   AND   SEPTENNATE.  103 

when  the  Ebrew  nation  left  its  primitive  agricultural  state 
and  became  more  largely  industrial  and  commercial.  So, 
debts  on  pawn  were  not  forfeited;  and  above  all  by  the 
legal  exemption  of  the  " Priisbul.''  (^) 

Thus  we  read  in  "  Shebiith "  Mishna  (10,  2  to  8,)  the 
following :  There  is  non-cancellation  of  debts  secured  by 
pawn,  and  for  him  who  registers  his  asset-notes  at  the  courts. 
Nor  does  the  Prusbul  admit  of  cancellation.  This  is  one  of 
the  enactments  of  Hillel  the  Elder  (first  cent.  B.  C.)  See- 
ing that  the  people  abstained  from  lending  each  other  (on 
account  of  the  Release-year),  he  contrived  the  above  Prus- 
bul (or  act  of  postponement  of  payment).  The  act  read 
thus :  "  I  herewith  declare  to  you,  Judges  N.  N.,  that  on  all 
my  active  debts  and  assets,  I  reserve  the  right  of  collecting 
and  receiving  payment  for,  whenever  I  please  " — "  which 
act  judges  or  witnesses  signed." — The  Mishna  continues — 
ibidem  : — "When  the  debtor  offers,  during  the  Release-year, 
to  pay  his  debt,  then  the  creditor  should  offer  to  relinquish 
it,  and  when  the  debtor  insists  to  pay,  the  creditor  can 
accept.  Which  act  is  meritorious.^^  ('^)  Allusions  to  the 
Jubilee  and  Release  Institutions  we  find  enough:  In 
Isaiah  37,  30,  and  Jeremiah  7,  12;  Ezekiel  46,  17,  calls  it 
the  year  of  liberty !  ('j  a  new  term,  then.  The  word  Jubilee 
is  derived  from  the  Ebrew  ^n%  meaning  to  stream  or  to 
violently  flow;  from  the  strong  sounding  of  the  cornet,  pro- 
claiming on  the  tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month  the  entrance 
of  the  Liberty-year.  According  to  various  allusions  in  the 
Bible,  the  family-lot  was  fairly  kept  up  and  retained  in  the 
respective  families  and  tribes.  According  to  Sibra  (Behar. 
2,  3,)  the  first  interruption  in  that  institution  occurred  when 
the  two  and  a-half  tribes  residing  beyond  the  Jordan  were 
driven  into  exile.     Later,  again,  after  the  ten  tribes  of  the 

(1)     Pros-bouly,  ^ntnD 

•irDn  nmj  Dvran  nn    (2) 
•ii-nn  nrc    i.3) 


104  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

kingdom  of  Israel  were  conquered  and  exiled  by  King  Sal- 
uianassar,  of  Assyria.  It  was  reintroduced  by  King  Josia, 
of  Judsea;  again  suspended  after  the  destruction  of  that 
kingdom,  and  again  introduced  by  Nehemiah  (10, 32).  During 
the  II  Temple  and  empire,  that  institution  is  frequently 
mentioned  by  Jewish  and  Gentile  writers,  in  Josephus, 
Tacitus,  etc.,  as  a  live  institution  and  described  as  above. 

After  the  destruction  of  the  second  Jewish  empire,  it 
was  again  revived  and  kept  up,  but  hardly  understood. 
Thus,  it  became  a  greac  drawback.  Rabbi  Jehudah,  (II 
century  P.  C),  the  prince  had  the  idea  of  abolishing  it 
entirely  as  no  longer  opportune,  but  he  was  foiled  in  this, 
his  intention,  by  his  other  more  conservative  colleagues. 
(Jerushalmi  Taanith,  66  a.)  Slowly  it  decayed,  and  when, 
later,  the  Romans  insisted  upon  their  tribute  even  during 
tliat  year,  it  was  suffered  to  fall  into  desuetude.  (See  Ham- 
burger's Real  Encyclop.  on  this  subject.) 

Where  we  find  in  our  forest  ramblings  a  mighty  tree  with 
a  sound,  round,  vast  stem  and  lofty,  thick,  powerful  branches, 
stretching  into  all  directions  around  and  above,  towering  to 
the  ethereal  sky,  yielding  exquisite  shade  to  brute  and  man, 
and  a  refreshing  pool  or  well  murmuring  at  its  feet,  we  are 
vividly  reminded  of  the  mighty  roots  entwined  deeply  in 
the  earth,  giving  support  and  strength  and  sap  to  that  tree. 
Even  so  when  we  contemplate  that  far-reaching  Jubilee  and 
Release-Year  Institution,  we  ask,  where  is  the  deej)  root  of 
that  vast  tree?  How  powerful  must  it  not  be  to  give  sup- 
port to  such  a  growth?  This  root  is  the  Sabbath,  of  which 
we  shall  speak  later  in  the  following  pages,  having  first  to 
survey  a  great  question  intimately  connected  with  tlie  above 
theme. 

Bible  and  Communism. 

A  rough,  crude  attempt  at  settling  the  all-absorbing  social 
question,  is  communism.  It  is  a  remedy  suggested  by 
hunger,  folly  and  despair,  developed  into  some  sort  of  sys- 


BIBLE    AND    COMMUNISM.  105 

tern  by  inebriated  science,  takiny:  brute  force  as  a  measure 
of  ri^lit,  a  remedy  a^'ainst  the  two  extremes,  grasping  accu- 
mulation on  one  hand  and  excessive  poverty  on  the  other 
hand.  That  crude,  first  outline  of  communism  attempts  at 
making  the  State  the  only  one  proprietor  of  all  and  every- 
thing, and  all  the  citizens  one  great  herd  of  passive  subjects 
and  obedient  workers,  unfree  tools  in  the  hands  of  the 
leaders.  It  is  a  trial  to  make  man  a  machine,  to  rob  him 
of  all  his  rights  to  individuality  and  to  property.  He  shall 
not  own  his  own  will,  his  i)erson,  taste  and  inclination, 
aspiration  and  effort.  He  shall  not  own  his  own  house,  his 
wife,  his  child;  he  shall  labor  as  an  ox,  a  machine,  for  the 
State.  The  State  shall  be  the  sole  employer,  the  only 
boarding  house,  furnishing  him  with  meagre,  Spartan  meals, 
scanty  raiment  and  lodging,  without  any  regard  for  his 
taste,  his  merit,  his  work.  That  system  deprives  man  of 
all  inclination,  of  every  incentive  to  effort,  labor  and  dis- 
tinction; it  robs  him  of  all  personality,  all  moral  freedom, 
all  noble  emulation;  it  opens  the  crib  for  all,  happiness  to 
none ;  it  satisfies  the  beast,  not  the  man.  To  all  appearances, 
that  kind  of  communism  is  the  first  rude  trial  of  socialism, 
its  later,  higher  evolution.  That  communism  cures  the 
patient  by  decapitation.  The  veteran  Frenchman,  St.  Juste, 
sardonically  said  :  "  The  right  of  the  people  is  bread."  The 
communistic  politicians  took  him  at  his  literal  word.  They 
offer  the  people  bread — at  the  expense  of  all  human  happi- 
ness; they  save  the  animal  by  sacrificing  man.  But  man 
wants  something  more  than  bread ;  he  wants  education,  cul- 
ture, sympathy — a  happy,  developed  self.  Communism 
forgot  that. 

Not  so  IVIosaism.  It  suggests  to  solve  the  question  as  old 
as  man  is,  in  a  more  rational  way — by  the  .lubilee  Cycle.  It 
secures  the  bread  of  the  poor,  but  also  his  freedom,  his 
Individuality,  his  culture — Sabbath — his  family,  his  happi- 
ness.    Mosaism  allows  us  to  acquire  as  much  as  our  skill 


108  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

and  industry  permit.  "  Conquer  matter,"  utilize  forces 
and  chances  (Genes.  I.  281,  have  the  advantages  of  your 
talents  and  your  thrift.  But  be  moderate,  reasonable,  mer- 
ciful. Crush  not  your  neii^hbor ;  take  not  advantage  of  his 
weakness  or  simplicity.  Remember,  live  and  let  live ;  his 
person  is  sacred ;  his  field,  his  home,  his  wife  and  children, 
are  sacred.  His  patrimony  must  never  be  estranged  from 
him  and  his  family.  When  poor,  you  are  bound  to  help 
him  to  a  competency,  not  by  alms,  not  by  making  him  a 
pauper,  but  by  encouraging  him,  backing  him,  helping  him. 
to  an  independence,  for  he  is  your  brother.  What  a  vast 
difference  between  that  genuine  benevolence  and  the  one 
usually  in  practice ;  the  hypocritical,  painted  benevolence, 
the  real  bitter  competition,  the  venomous  jealousy  or 
revenge,  offering  a  neighbor  some  showy  assistance,  in  order 
to  gain  the  appearance  of  charitableness,  and  at  the  very 
same  moment  making  all  efforts  to  crush  him  and  his 
manly  independence,  to  loAver  his  public  standing  and 
stamping  him  a  pauper.  .  .  .  The  biblical  way  alone 
solves  the  social  question. 

Whilst  our  present  economical  system  is  crushing  compe- 
tition and  "ring"  policy;  whilst  communism  is  robbing  us 
of  all  our  individuality,  making  us  machines,  the  Penta- 
teuch takes  a  middle  course,  yet  teaches,  "Live  and  let 
live.  Work  and  acquire,  and  let  room  for  others,  too- 
Enjoy  and  let  enjoy;  emulation,  yet  sympathy,  too;  egoism 
tempered  with  altruism.  Love  thy  neighbor,  love  the 
stranger  as  thyself."  Hence,  let  not  be  all  accumulation 
on  one  side  and  all  destitution  on  the  other.  Human  effort 
has  free  scope ;  yet  remorseless,  soulless  competition  is 
stigmatized  and  checked.  In  that  manner  is  individual 
liberty  and  social  equality  built  up  there,  upon  the  solid 
rock  of  economical  equality  ;  upon  fair  and  impartial  distri- 
bution of  the  national  wealth  among  all  the  members  of 
the  commonwealth.     The  Release-year   is   partial  restora- 


BIBLE    AND    SOCIALISM.  107 

tion,  the  Jubilee  is  total  restoration  of  the  freedom  of  man 
and  soil,  yet  fully  in  accord  with  the  principle  of  property. 
That  Septennate  is  a  social,  peaceful  revolution,  a  fair  read- 
justment, a  restaur atio  in  integrum,  without  violent  com- 
motion or  bloodshed.  It  is  the  gravitation  force  of  the  social 
pendulum  ever  vibrating  off,  to  the  right  and  the  left, 
towards  plutocracy  or  proletariat. 

INIatthew  Arnold. 

According  to  that  late  English  critic,  we  have  not  in  our 
United  States  any  ideal  civilization,  not  much  of  distinc- 
tion, nor  much  of  the  beautiful.  But  we  have  a  good  deal 
of  political  and  social  advancement.  American  legislators, 
he  says,  ''  see  straight  and  go  straight  on  all  political  and 
social  questions."  This  is  something  to  atone  for  and  to 
render  us  hopeful  concerning  the  ideal  sides  of  our  civiliza- 
tion. Let  our  American  lawgivers  and  economists  ponder 
over  the  institutions  just  discussed.  Having  realized  so 
much  in  the  domain  of  liberty  and  equality,  something 
should  be  done  now  for  their  necessary  complement — a 
fairer  distribution  of  the  national  wealth ;  or  competition 
will  run  mad  and  may  ruin  democracy.  Think  of  it!  Messrs, 
Gould  are  complaining  of  over-taxation! 

Bible  and  Socialism. 

We  have  seen  that  the  iBrst  rough  outline  of  communism 
does  not  contain  much  for  the  edification  of  the  liumanist 
or  the  economist.  That  is  a  trial  to  help  up  the  brute,  to  fill 
his  crib,  not  to  rescue  man  and  woman  with  all  their  nobler 
aspirations.  Otherwise,  it  stands  with  the  later  and  more 
recent  development  of  communism.  Otherwise,  it  is  with 
its  present  evolution,  socialism  as  formulated  by  Rodber- 
tus,  Engels,  and  especially  by  the  scientific  expounder  of 
that  doctrine,  I  mean  Karl  Marx ;  as  introduced  into  practi- 
cal politics  by  the  German  Social  Democracy,  headed  by 


108  8PIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

Lasalle  and  by  the  English  International,  inaugurated,  too, 
by  Karl  Marx.  Rejecting  the  coinmunism  as  attempted  in 
olden  and  in  modern  times  by  men  of  the  calibre  of  Catiline, 
or  by  adventurers  of  the  temper  of  John  of  Leyden,  and 
in  our  own  times  by  such  as  Babeuf  or  Spies,  etc. — rejecting 
such  attempts  at  violence  and  incendiarism,  as  contrary  to 
comm')n  sensf^  and  contrary  to  the  Bible,  we  cannot  refuse 
our  respect  and  full  consideration  to  its  latest  evolution, 
denominated  Socialism,  or  Social  Democracy;  without 
being  hasty,  even  there,  in  giving  our  indiscriminate  assent 
to  all  its  propositions. 

Wonderful!  There  we  shall  find  out  its  many  points  of  con- 
tact and  many  other  points  of  striking  contrast  with  the 
Mosaic  scheme.  Nay,  we  shall  recognize  even  a  strongaffinity 
between  the  two  systems,  a  kind  of  derivation,  as  between 
parent  and  offspring,  as  one  developed  from  the  other,  no 
doubt  with  great  variations  in  essentials  and  accidentals. 
Let  us  begin  with  the  practical  part  of  that  system,  as 
embodied  in  the  program  of  the  followers  of  Karl  Marx  and 
of  Lasalle — fused  in  Gotlia,  Germany;  the  program  promul- 
gated in  May,  1875.  We  shall  have  later  enough  of  oppor- 
tunity to  dilate  on  the  theory  and  abstruse  principles  of  the 
State  according  to  Marx  and  of  society  according  to  Moses. 
But  for  the  moment  let  us  begin  to  look  at  the  practical 
features  of  the  socialistic  system  in  parallel  with  the  Pen- 
tateucal  one.  The  above-named  Gotha  program  proclaims 
the  following : 

Program  of  Socialism. 

"I.  Labor  is  the  source  of  all  wealth  and  of  all  culture. 
To  society  and  all  its  members,  belongs  the  entire  product 
of  labor ;  by  equal  right ;  to  each  according  to  his  reasonable 
wants;  all  being  bound  to  work.  In  the  existing  society 
the  tools  of  labor  belong  to  the  capitalists;  hence, 
the  subjugation  of  the  working  classes;  this  is  the  source 


KARL    MARX's    DOCTRINE.  109 

of  their  wretclieduess  and  servitude.  Their  emancipation 
therefore  demands  the  transfer  of  such  instruments  of  labor 
into  the  common  property  of  society.  Further,  it  demands 
society's  control  of  all  labor,  the  product  of  that  labor  to 
be  for  the  common  good  and  use,  for  just  distribution 
among-  all. 

"  II.  The  socialistic  workingman's  party  aims  at  a  free 
State  and  a  free  society ;  at  destroying  the  iron  law  of 
wages  and  removing  exploitation  and  inequality.  That 
party  acknowledges  the  international  character  of  the  labor 
movement  and  desires  the  realization  of  the  universal 
brotherhood  of  men.  ...  In  order  to  solve  the  social 
question,  the  party  demands  the  establishment  of  socialistic 
productive  associations,  with  State  help,  under  democratic 
control  by  the  laboring  people,  for  industry  and  agriculture, 
slowly  developing  all  labor.  .  .  .  They  demand  univer- 
sal suffrage,  universal  military  duty,  no  standing  armies, 
direct  legislation  by  the  people,  no  exceptional  laws,  one 
single  progressive  income  tax,  etc.,  etc." 

Now,  we  must  not  forget  that  this  programme  of  the 
German  Socialistic  party  of  1875  is  a  practical  exposition  of 
its  aspirations,  a  good  deal  tempered  with  prudence,  aiming 
at  the  now  feasible  and  possible,  under  the  regime  of 
Bismarck  and  successors,  etc.,  and  the  Kaiser,  by  no  means 
merciful  towards  socialism.  That  programme  is  the  lion's 
paw  in  a  fur  glove  of  prudence  and  caution.  In  order  to 
know  the  real  tenor  of  the  doctrine,  not  even  according  to 
the  versions  of  Bakunin  and  Baheuf,  the  revolutionary 
anarchists,  but  after  the  scientific,  humane  and  prudent 
Karl  Marx,  Engels,  etc.,  let  us  study  the  latter  system  in  its 
general  outline  at  least. 

Karl  Marx's  Doctrine. 

Karl  Marx,  in  his  great  work,  "The  Capital,"  a  wonderful 
scientific  work,  the  fruit  of  forty  years'  experience  and  of  a 


110  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

lifetime  devoted  to  ardent  study,  philanthropic  aspirations 
and  practical  initiative  in  the  workshop  and  in  behalf  of 
the  proletarians, — this  work,  "Capital,"  the  Bible  of  social- 
ism, teaches  essentially  the  following  doctrine  : 

Labor  is  the  source  of  all  value.  All  objects  of  human 
usefulness  derive  their  mercantile  value  from  the  labor 
bestowed  on  them.  Air  and  sunliglit,  for  instance,  are  most 
useful,  but  since  they  require  no  human  work,  since 
nature  yields  them  spontaneously  in  great  abundance,  they 
have  no  marketable  value.  But  in  order  to  create  a  pair  of 
shoes,  do  we  not  need  also  materials  and  tools?  No  doubt, 
but  they,  too,  are  the  result  of  labor.  Hence  is  labor  the 
creator  of  the  article  in  its  present  form,  as  shoes,  and  in 
its  former  form,  as  leather,  skin  or  animal ; — the  first  ele- 
ments come  from  the  soil,  and  the  soil  is  nature's,  and 
belongs  to  all  alike.  The  present  use-value  of  the  shoes, 
is  therefore  the  labor  bestowed  on  them.  '■'■Labor,  as  the 
source  of  all  xialue,^^i&  a  kind  of  acknowledged  head-princi- 
ple of  the  leading  political  economists  before  Marx.  He 
only  developed  it  to  a  grand  system  of  economics,  the  doc- 
trine of  socialism. 

Now,  that  all-absorbing  and  all-creating  labor  is  performed 
by  the  workingman ;  hence  all  the  value  extant,  all  useful 
things,  all  real  wealth,  is  the  product  of  his  toil,  and  by  right 
is  his — the  just  reward  of  his  work!  Now,  what  do  we  see 
in  actual  society,  as  it  is,  before  our  eyes  ?  The  laborer, 
the  producer  of  all  value,  gets  but  a  pittance  thereof,  hardly 
enough  to  sustain  himself  and  his  family,  viz.,  the  present 
and  the  future  workers  and  drudges,  whilst  the  surplus 
of  value  goes  to  the — Capitalist,  under  the  pretense  of 
rent  for  his  lands,  his  machines,  his  tools  and  his  outlays. — 
But  lands  are  nature's;  the  capitalist  did  not  create  lands; 
and  the  machines,  tools  and  outlays  have  been,  too,  created 
by  the  workingman's  labor,  and  are,  therefore,  his,  and  their 
produce  ought  to  be  his;  all  real  value  and  wealth  being 


KARL    MARX's   DOCTRINE.  Ill 

the  fruit  of  work,  they  must  go  to  the  worker,  not  to  the 
capitalist,  the  drone.  But  what  happens  actually?  After 
the  pittance-wage  for  the  work  has  been  paid,  the  '^surplus 
7)alue^^  goes  to  the  capitalist,  and  accumulates  his  capital. 
Capital  is  thus  the  accumulation  of  unpaid  labor.  The 
laborer  got  only  a  fraction  for  his  sweat,  his  waste  of  life 
and  his  enslavement.  The  surplus  goes  to  the  capitalist, 
who  has  been  living  in  idleness  and  luxuriance.  Thus  is 
established  the  startling  doctrine  that  capital  is  robbery. 
But  has  not  the  capitalist  powerfully  contributed  to  the 
creation  of  the  goods  by  his  lands,  his  machines,  his  tools, 
his  superintendence,  his  outlays?  No!  These  claims  are 
fictitious.  The  land  is  owned  by  nature.—"  He  that  first 
enclosed  a  field  and  declared  '  this  is  mine/  was  the  first 
robber"  (J.  J.  Rousseau).  Machines  and  tools  are  the  product 
of  work.  The  capitalist  never  did  any  work ;  his  claims 
are  thus  contrived ;  he  cheaply  came  to  lands,  tools, 
machines,  etc.,  by  conquest  and  robbery,  or  inheritance,  a 
doubtful  title,  too,  or  by  accumulating  the  surplus  of 
unpaid  labor — that  is,  by  over-reaching  the  laborer,  who 
had  to  give  his  work  for  a  song.  There  was  no  free  con- 
tract. He  was  compelled  by  the  fierce  competition  of  his 
fellow-proletarians  to  undersell  his  labor;  he  was  hand- 
cuffed by  the  '' iron  law  of  wages.''  Indeed,  when  there  is 
but  one  morsel  of  bread  and  five  hungry  mouths,  there  is  no 
free  competition,  but  actual  slavery.  Says  Odysseus  tersely, 
Odyss.,  VII,  216 :  "  There  is  not  such  another  formidable 
thing  and  more  doggish  than  a  hungry  stomach,  forcibly 
compelling  us  to  think  of  him."(^)  Our  workingman,  the  real 
and  only  creator  of  wealth,  being  poor,  was  not  free  to 
wait  and  abide  his  time ;  hunger  compelling  him,  he  was  no 
free  party  in  his  contract  with  the  cunning  and  wealthy 
capitalist.    The  so-called  free  laborer  is  actually  a  slave,  and 

(1).  oh  yap  ri  aTvyepiJ  ekX  yaaTtpt  Kiivrepov  aTJiO 
£7r/l£ro,f/r'  EKk'ksvaEV  eo  fivijaac&ai  avdyKij. 


112  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

tlie  employer  is  his  tyrant,  who  puts  him  to  such  a  stress  as 
to  work  for  half  value  and  leave  the  other  half  to  the 
master  himself.  The  doctrine,  universally  accepted,  that 
all  wealth  derives  from  work,  flagrantly  contradicts  the . 
principle  of  the  "  iron  law  of  loages,^^  this  being  but  the 
tyranny  of  soulless  competition,  the  workingman  being 
really  compelled  to  his  bargain. — Hence,  is  there  flagrant 
over-reaching;  the  capitalist  is  accumulating  the  surplus 
value  of  unpaid  labor,  and  he  is  simply  a  robber,  a 
usurer,  a  "  Harpagon." 

Criticism  of   Marx's  System. 

So  far  Karl  Marx's  reasonings.  But  they  are  not  wholly 
correct.  Admitted  that  some  capitalists  may  have  come  to 
part  of  their  capital  by  foul  means,  or  at  least  doubtful 
means,  as  conquest,  fraud,  violence,  etc.,  that  does  not 
imply  that  all  capitalists  have  acquired  all  capital  by  foul 
means.  Admitted  that  conquests,  over-reaching,  pandering 
to  princes,  etc.,  are  impure  sources  of  acquisition,  reason 
and  fairness  can  but  respect  capital  when  it  is  the  outcome 
of  one's  own  honest  savings  and  industry,  or  that  of  our 
father's  life-long  accumulations;  and  the  rent  of  that  econ- 
omized capital  is  as  justly  ours  as  the  capital  itself.  And 
if  with  that  we  buy  lands  or  machines  or  tools,  which  are 
indispensably  necessary  for  work,  we  are  too,  no  doubt, 
entitled  to  their  rent. 

Thus  all  the  great  learning  and  ingenuity  of  Marx  to 
prove  the  doubtful  sources  of  some  ownership,  cannot  shake 
the  firm  base  of  property  in*  general ;  cannot  prove  that  all 
ownership  is  robbery,  that  all  is  the  result  of  taking  advan- 
tage of  the  distressed  laborer,  crushed  by  the  iron  law  of 
offer  and  demand.  Still,  there  is  some  truth  in  all  his  reason- 
ings. They  prove  that  great  landlordism,  etc.,  may  be  tainted 
with  a  foul  origin ;  that  often  profits  go  the  wrong  Avay ;  that 
employers,  being   stout-hearted,  few  and  rich,  whilst   the 


HERBERT    SPENCER    OX    PROPERTY.  113 

workers  are  many  and  poor,  these  labor  under  great  disad- 
vantages ;  that  there  is  no  freedom  of  contract  between 
such  unequal  parties ;  that  competition  may  be  carried  to  a 
dangerous  excess,  or  rather,  that  there  is,  on  such  terms,  no 
real,  free  competition,  but  a  taking  advantage  and  over- 
reaching, coarse  and  mean,  and  that  the  law  ought  to  look 
to  it.     .     .     . 

Let  us  take  as  an  instance  the  landownership  in  our  own, 
young  American  society.  No  doubt,  the  first  title  to  the 
lands  by  the  first  conquerors  is  a  precarious  one.  The  Amer- 
ican land  belonged  either  to  the  Indians  or  to  any  human 
being  settling  en  and  fertilizing  it.  Originally,  the  Bible 
states  correctly  :  "  Mine  is  the  land ;  ye  a,re  but  My  tenants." 
Each  shall  have  his  lot  and  keep  it.  But  does  that  prove 
that  the  owner  of  the  house  I  live  in  is  a  robber?  That  he 
is  not  entitled  to  his  rent?  By  no  means.  The  land,  origi- 
nally seized  upon,  robbed  or  surreptitiously  got  for  a  toy,  a 
string  of  beads  or  for  a  barrel  of  whiskv,  a  pistol  or  a  pouch 
of  powder,  has  since  passed  through  a  hundred  hands ;  the 
last  hand  has  paid  the  full  price  thereof,  and  asks  now  his 
rent.  Is  he  not  entitled  to  it?  Of  course  he  is.  The  same, 
when  Charles  V  or  Philip  II  of  Spain  got  their  galleons 
of  gold  from  Mexico  and  Peru  by  putting  its  owners,  the 
" savages,^^  on  burning  coals,  or  by  "teaching  them  true 
religion."  That  gold  dollar  had  a  sad  origin.  But  for  that 
same  dollar  you,  honest  reader,  have  been  working  a  day  or 
an  hour.  Is  that  dollar  not  honestly  yours?  Can  I  say 
that  property  is  robbery  ?     That  would  be  absurd. 

Herbert  Spencer  on  Property. 

In  his  "  Sociology,"  Vol.  I,  p.  292,  and  more  especially  in 
"  Sociology,"  Vol.  II,  pp.  536  to  541,  Herbert  Spencer  makes 
a  profound  study  of  the  property  question.  With  his  usual 
mastery  of  facts  and  sagacity  of  reasoning,  he  shows  that 
"  the  desire  to  appropriate  and  keep  that  which  has  once 


114  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATIOX. 

been  appropriated  lies  deeply  not  in  human  nature  only,  but 
in  animal  nature,  too,  being  indeed  a  condition  to  survival. 
The  consciousness  thereof  tends  to  establish  the  custom 
of  leaving-  each  in  possession  of  what  he  has  obtained  by 
labor,  and  this  claim  is  soon  admitted  by  primitive  men. 
.  .  .  We  see  the  claim  to  exclusive  property  understood 
by  a  dog  fighting  in  defence  of  his  master's  clothing,  left  in 
charge  of  him.  ...  So  savages  are  boldly  insisting 
upon  their  own  weapons,  canoes,  huts,  women,  children, 
etc." 

Herbert  Spencer  admits  that  the  property  title  to  the 
soil  is  not  so  clear  as  that  to  movables  created  by  private 
labor.  He  says,  then,  §539 :  "  At  first  land  appears  to  be 
common  property;  how  did  possession  of  it  become  indi- 
vidualized? Force  in  one  form  or  another  is  the  sole  ade- 
quate cause  to  make  the  members  of  a  society  yield  up 
their  just  claims  to  the  area  they  inhabit  ...  to  an 
external  or  internal  aggressor,  (conquest  or  usurpation)." 
He  ominously  concludes :  "  While  private  possession  of 
things  produced  by  labor  will  grow  even  more  sacred  than 
now,  the  inhabited  area  which  cannot  be  produced  by  labor 
wixl  not  be  privately  possessed.  .  .  As  personal  slavery 
was  slowly  abolished,  so  may  be  that  of  the  land,  and 
again  become  the  property  of  all."  Let  us  return  to  the 
original  question,  having  given  Spencer's  opinion  in  paren- 
thesis and  having  seen  that  the  theory  that  "  Property  is 
Robbery  "  is  untenable. 

Dishonest  and  Honest  Competition. 

But  now  comes  another  side  of  the  question,  entirely 
overlooked,  it  seems,  by.  socialists,  viz :  the  important 
intellectual  part  of  business,  lodged  in  the  chief.  Now 
comes  mental  work,  risks,  force  of  initiative,  commercial 
enterprise,  capacity,  solidarity,  breadth  of  combination,  etc. 
All  these  belong  not  to  the  workingmen  in  the  factory,  but 


LAISSEZ    ALLER.  115 

to  the  careworn,  thoughtful  proprietor,  partner  or  business 
manager  in  the  rear  office  box,  in  the  stately  front  cabinet 
or  parlor,  the  sanctum  of  the  head  of  the  vast  combination. 
Can  any  reasonable  man  say  that  the  clerks  and  porters  and 
office  boys  run  the  establishment,  and  that  the  leader, 
standing  on  the  watchtower  with  frowning  mien  and  anx- 
ious look,  scaiming  the  newspapers  and  telegrams  and 
telephones,  calculating  the  chances  of  the  crops  in  America, 
the  wars  in  Europe  and  the  uprisings  in  Asia,  weighing 
mentally,  and  balancing  whether  it  is  opportune  to  sell  or 
buy,  to  wait  or  act,  to  take  hold  or  let  go, — can  any  one  say 
that  that  brain,  which  gave  the  impulse  to  every  motion, 
upon  which  everything  is  staked — that  that  busy  Tnental 
worker  is  a  drone,  an  idler,  living  upon  the  "surplus  value 
of  unpaid  labor"  of  the  workingmen?  By  no  means.  Hence, 
the  first  axiom  of  the  system,  viz :  that  labor  is  the  source 
of  all  value;  that  value  is  produced  by  the  labor  of  the 
mechanical  worker  alone,  and  without  the  chief  and  pro- 
prietor's initiative ;  that,  therefore,  rent  for  land,  tools  and 
machines,  and  the  interest  of  the  capital  and  the  risks 
underlying  the  business  and  the  profit  of  the  leaders,  are 
contrived  and  fictitious,  and  hence  a  robbery — that  doctrine 
needs  a  strong  qualification.  It  is  practically  untenable. 
As  matters  have  come  down  from  hoary  times,  have  crys- 
tallized and  become  organized  thought  of  civilized  men, 
the  idea  of  property  is  firmly  rooted  in  the  human  mind, — it 
is  an  instinct, — and  the  claim  that  it  is  but  robbery  is  simply 
a  paradox. 

Laissez  Aller. 

What,  then,  has  manTcind  gained  hy  the  studies  of  the 
modern  economists,  especially  by  those  of  Marx,  Engels 
and  Rodbertus?  A  good  deal!  The  conviction  that 
the  old  policy  of  '^laissez  faire''  and  '^laissez  aller" — 
^' Let  go" — is  incorrect;   that  unequal  as  the  struggle  for 


116  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

existence  is  between  classes  and  masses,  free  competition 
does  not  take  place  between  privileged  and  ostracised,  rich 
and  poor,  educated  and  uneducated,  etc. ;  that  free  compe- 
tition is  a  misnomer,  and  that  the  State  must  step  in,  into 
the  unequal  contest,  and  equalize  chances.  Now  the  extrem- 
ists want  us  to  throw  out  competition  and  give  everyone 
his  share  according  to  his  needs,  not  his  deeds;  that,  too,  is 
Utopian,  and  will  make  society  starve.  The  moderate  view 
is,  let  competition  stand,  but  make  it  equal,  free  and  with 
the  same  chances  for  all.  Then  nobody  will  crush  out  his 
neighbor,  nobody  being  so  much  superior  to  his  competitor. 
Each  will  have  work  and  bread,  whilst  the  industrious,  the 
gifted,  the  thrifty,  will  and  shall  have  more  than  bread,  for 
to  that  they  are  entitled.  And  society,  too,  will  gain  by 
superior  work.  In  such  a  way  we  shall  have  noble  emula- 
tion, not  beastly  competition,  and  that  alone  will  prove 
suflScient,  I  think,  to  settle  the  social  question. 

I  thus  believe  Marx's  scientific  analysis  has  shown,  not 
that  "property  is  robbery,"  nor  that  competition  is  unjust, — 
that  is  not  warranted;  that  is  jumping  at  conclusions. 
What  he  has  shown  is :  that  some  property  is  doubtful,  that 
the  relation  between  employer  and  employe  is  not  a  free 
one ;  hence,  the  contract  between  them  is  not  free  either ; 
that  wage-labor  is  but  a  masked  slavery,  that  there  is  no 
free  competition  in  reality;  there  is  but  a  taking  advan- 
tage of  destitution ;  that  society  ought  to  step  between  and 
protect  the  weaker  party.  Further,  that  we  ought  by  educa- 
tion, State  help,  unions,  etc.,  help  the  masses  to  restore 
FREE  COMPETITION,  wlieu  the  social  question  will  be  solved ; 
at  least  until  something  better  has  been  evolved.  What 
really  Karl  Marx  has  shown  is:  that  the  great  property 
holdings  are  not  all  allright ;  that  much  accumulation  was 
going  on  by  unfree  competition,  by  real  over-reaching; 
that  the  humbler  party  of  the  labor  contractors  are  hand- 
cuffed and  compelled   to  liLdersell   their  work.      Human 


LAISSEZ    ALLER.  117 

society,  therefore,  is  in  duty  bound  to  interfere  in  order  to 
avoid  moral  and  economic  bankruptcy  and  social  collapse. 
It  must  restore  tlie  equal  chances  in  the  battle  for  existence. 
It  must  make  competition  free  and  open.  These  are  the 
legitimate  results  of  Marx's  labors,  and  they  are  vast  and 
serious  enout^h  to  help  solve  the  social  question. 

This  solution  might  be  tried  in  the  following  several 
ways :  To  declare  at  once  all  property  the  property  of  all — • 
that  would  not  do !  It  would  not  be  just  nor  prudent.  The 
present  property-holders  will  fight,  and  will  probably  come 
out  victorious. — To  proscribe  all  competition  will  be  nearly 
as  difficult;  for  by  what  measure  else  shall  we  decide  upon 
merit  and  the  value  of  things  ?  The  rational  socialists 
do  not  propose  revolution,  confiscation,  immediate  assump- 
tion by  the  State  of  all  capital  and  all  production.  They 
believe  socialism  to  be  the  slow  growth  of  the  time,  the 
necessary  and  gradual  outcome  of  our  public  difficulties. 
They  claim  the  present  private  competitive  system  is 
anarchic  and  nigh  bankruptcy,  and  socialism  bound  to  be 
the  savior  of  society.  Hence,  let  us  go  slowly  and  by 
degrees.  What,  then,  would  be  the  middle  course  and  the 
connecting  link  between  now  and  the  future?  Might  we 
not  try  first  by  having  this  social  drawback  remedied, 
viz.,  competition  being  now  handcuffed  and  lamed  by  privi- 
lege, let  it  (competition)  he  free,  fair  and  honest ;  remove 
all  obstacles;  set  free  the  combatants  in  the  arena,  and  let 
us  see  whether  that  alone  would  not  do.  Indeed,  as  far  as 
I  see,  there  is  rather  no  competition,  and  that  is  our  real 
drawback;  there  is  but  sham  competition  allowe(3.  The 
commoner  cannot  compete  against  the  noble,  the  civilian 
cannot  against  the  military,  the  foreign -born  not  against 
the  native.  The  clericals  have  intrenched  their  rights 
against  free  competition.  The  learned  profession  have 
reserved  their  privileges  against  free  competition.  Such  is 
the  effort  by  every  trade  and  profession  to  erect  artificial 


118  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

intrencliinents  and  privileges  against  free  choice. — Wherever 
a  vacancy  occurs  and  candidates  compete,  look  behind  and 
you   will   find  the    backdoor    open    for    some    privileged 
aspirant.     Not  merit,  but  patronage,  family,  race,  denomi- 
nation, etc.;  prevail.     Publicly  is  free  competition  adver- 
tised, privately  is  prlmlege  practiced.    Ten  to  one  is  that 
the  case.     The  people  elect  the  best  flatterer  to  office.     The 
board  of  trustees,  of  directors,  of  managers,  etc.,  appoint, 
not  the  superior  candidate,  but  the  best-sustained  one — him 
with    the    largest    backing.     Why,   then,   overlook    that? 
There  is  really,  in  most  cases,  no  competition.     The  social 
contest  goes  on  really  by  mere  force,  not  merit ;  that  is  most 
glaringly,  unjust  and   palpably   wrong,   and   easily  to    be 
remedied.     Let  us  begin  there  our  reformation.     Society  is 
going   by   force;   let   us   begin  going  by  merit,   real   and 
honest.     Let  us  begin  with  the  introduction  of  real  and 
honest  competition.     Any  chance  in  life  shall  be  given  to 
the  most  competent  one — to  him  who  can  offer  the  best 
work    in    return.     Let   us   sincerely   abolish   brute   force, 
covered  by  rotten   privilege   and   patronage.     Among   the 
different  candidates,  let  he  or  she  be  selected  who  can  do 
the  best  work;  let  him  or  her  profit  by  their  own  industry, 
or  skill,  or  talent,  and  society  will  be  the  winner.     Then 
let   us  see  whether  that   alone  will   not  do  to   solve   the 
social  problem.     As  far  as  I  see,  social  wrong  is  going  on, 
not  for  crusljing  competition,  but  for  competition  crushed 
out  and   privilege   and  favoritism  put  in  instead.     Let  us^ 
therefore,  give  a  fair  trial  to  fair  competition.     Next  may 
come  another  social  phase.     We  have  been  going  by  force 
and  privilege.     Let  us  now  try  right,  viz.,  competition,  fair 
and  just.     Later  we  may  come  to  tov)e  in  place  of  right. 
This  proposition  of  real  competition  has  at  least  the  merit 
of  a  wise  and  honest  experiment.     Society  has  been  really 
going  on   by  the   principle   of  favoritism,   patronage   and 
privilege,  under  the  false  pretenses  of   free  competition. 


LAISSEZ    ALLEK.  119 

The  masses,  crushed  by  feudal  privilege,  mistook  it  for  com- 
petition ;  thus  duped,  they  think  that  to  be  at  the  bottom  of 
our  social  Pandora-box:  "Down  with  competition;  it  is 
cruel  and  crushing!"  shout  the  woe-stricken  in  their  dilem- 
ma: "It  is  giving  all  advantage  to  the  stronger."  No  doubt, 
free  competition  is  not  ideal.  It  does  give  the  premium 
to  the  stronger,  the  wiser,  the  more  persevering. — But  at 
least  it  is  just,  if  not  ideal. — Let  us  give  it  a  fair  trial. — Let  us 
begin  going  by  free  competition.  Let  us  give  to  the  greater 
merit,  the  greater  premium. — Anj  how,  society  will  gain 
by  it,  it  will  realize  better  work;  whilst  by  patronage 
society  is  undoubtedly  the  loser — and  none  the  gainer,  but 
inferiority. — Should  time  show  that  free  competition  will 
not  remedy  the  social  question,  we  can  then  resort  to  the 
No-competition-policy,  and  give  each  according  to  needs,  not 
merits.  In  one  word:  The  hue  and  cry  that  free  competi- 
tion is  at  the  bottom  of  our  social  evils,  is  anyhow  prema- 
ture, unproven  and  perhaps  contrived,  for  it  is  a  fact? 
palpable  to  every  close  observer,  that  society  goes  as  yet 
by  privilege  and  stratagem,  not  by  honest  and  free  compe- 
tition, hence  the  present  social  evils  cannot  be  put  at  its 
door. — Now  consider  :  privilege  and  patronage  are  decidedly 
wrong  and  foolish.  Competition,  indeed,  is  hard  and  sharp, 
but  it  is  just.  Socialism  aims  at  the  ideal  of  non-compe- 
tition, at  giving  according  to  needs — not  merits.  Would  it 
not  be  wiser  not  to  jump  to  the  ideal,  but  begin  with  the 
just  and  the  real,  before  we  take  refuge  in  the  ideal? 

Now  this  tempered  competition,  to  give  everyone  his 
reward  according  to  his  real  merit — not  favoritism  or  privi- 
lege— is  represented  in  the  Biblical  State.  "One  law  for 
native  and  stranger."  "  Discriminate  not  in  justice," — 
"favor  not  the  poor,  nor  the  rich."  "Have  not  two  stones 
and  two  measures."  "Justice  is  God's;  tamper  not  with 
it,"  etc.     Could  not  statesmen  learn  therefrom? 


120  spirit  of  the  biblical  legislation. 

Karl  Marx — Continued. 

Karl  Marx  believes  to  have  proven,  after  reviewing,  the 
history  of  wealth  and  property,  that  lands,  instruments 
and  capital  belong  to  all  and  have  been  usurped  by  a  few. 
Therefore  are  these  few  not  entitled  to  them,  nor  to  their 
rent.  He  shows  that  political  history  began  in  hoary  times 
with  slavery;  that  thereupon,  after  the  migration  of  the 
Teutonic  nations  and  the  collapse  of  the  Roman  Empire, 
came  serfdom  and  feudalism  ;  that  with  the  reformation,  the 
confiscation  of  church-property,  the  discovery  of  America, 
of  gunpowder  and  the  printing  press,  the  collapse  of  feudal- 
ism, the  utilization  of  steam,  the  inventions  of  machines, 
etc.,  and  after  the  American  and  French  Revolutions — serf- 
dom gave  way  and  made  room  for  wage-labor.  He  shows 
that  this  is  but  a  masked  slavery,  that  the  proletarians  are 
severed  from  the  means  of  human  comforts  and  human 
culture,  that  society  is  on  the  way  to  anarchy  and  bank- 
ruptcy, and  that  a  new  social  phase  is  ready  to  dawn,  which 
is  to  right  this  long  wronged  fourth  estate,  the  masses ;  in 
place  of  the  present,  private,  competitive  capital  and  wage- 
labor  is  coming  the  era  of  collective  capital  and  associated 
labor,  for  the  good  of  all.  The  profit  is  to  belong  to  all 
society,  to  all  its  members  and  workers,  which  profit  shall 
be  divided  out  according  to  some  "equitable  principle." 

What  is  that  equitable  principle  ?  Shall  there  be  some 
discrimination  made  among  the  different  crafts?  Between 
the  degrees  of  capacity?  Between  excellent,  good  and 
indifferent  woik?  Wlio  shall  be  the  arbiter?  Who  shall 
formulate  that  equitable  principle?  Who  shall  administer 
the  distribution  ot  profits?  Shall  there  be  rulers  in  the 
future  society  or  not?  These  different  questions  are 
diversely  answered  by  the  several  doctrinaires  of  the  sys- 
tem. Indeed,  these  questions  are  hard  to  answer;  yea,  they 
are  absolutely  impossible  to  answer,  for  they  are  relative. 


KARL    mark's    optimism.  121 

They  depend  upon  factors  we  know  not,  and  which  alone 
will  determine  the  mode  of  solution. 

Bakunin's  Fallacies. 

Bakunin,  the  Russian  Anarchist,  wants  no  rulers  what- 
ever, for  rulers  will  soon  be  tyrants.  They  will  rule  to  keep 
forever  the  people  as  slaves  for  exploitation,  for  the  advan- 
tage of  the  leaders.  He  wants  only  such  laws  and  restraints 
as  are  self-evident  and  dictated  by  nature,  and  will  be 
obeyed  without  coercion. 

A  great  idealist  is  he,  that  terrible  Anarchist  Bakunin! 
His  ideals  will  need  a  long  while  before  they  be  real.  It 
may  need  ceons  of  years  before  man  will  obey  the  laws  of 
nature  without  coercion.  All  good  laws  now  extant,  from  the 
decalogue  downwards,  are  mostly,  if  not  all,  rational,  natural 
and  self-evident  to  the  impartial  and  honest  reasoner.  Yet 
they  need  coercion  to  make  them  be  obeyed.  ''  Pray  for  the 
government,"  says  an  oriental  proverb;  "If  not  for  that, 
men  would  swallow  each  other  alive."  C) 

Again,  if  we  shall  have  laws,  king.  Senate  or  Parliament 
must  make  them,  and  that  means  again  monarchy  or  aris- 
tocracy or  oligarchy ;  that  means  rulers,  and  we  have  thus 
come  back  to  the  position  where  we  started  from.  Again, 
Saint  Simon  and  Owen  had  an  idea  of  utilizing  the  exist- 
ing governments,  the  patriarchal,  the  sacerdotal  or  the 
monarchical,  for  the  realization  of  their  designs.  Bakunin's 
ideas  appear  thus  utopian.     AFen  need  government. 

Karl  Makx's  Optimism. 

Karl  Marx,  the  most  scientific  and  sober-minded  of  the 
socialistic  galaxy,  is  at  the  same  time  the  most  noble 
idealist,  and,  I  am  afraid,  the  greatest  dreamer,  too.  He 
expects  a  real  millenium  from  social  democracy.  Having 
himself  spent  a  noble  life  in  toil  and  sacrifice,  in  abnegation 


122  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

and  poverty  for  the  good  of  the  masses,  he  believes  in  a 
whole  crop  of  such  unselfishness  and  altruism.  His  nobility 
of  idealism  strikingly  proves  him  to  be  a  son  of  the 
prophets — a  self-sacrificing  Messiah  of  our  own  times.  How 
does  he  solve  the  problem  ?  The  social  democracy  will 
need  laws  and  lawgivers  and  leaders,  and  these  will  be  the 
best,  the  noblest,  the  most  refined,  just  as  the  Mosaic  "elders'' 
and  the  Platonic  ''sat^'es."  They  will  be  picked  out  by  the 
people,  not  for  flattery,  but  for  real  merit;  and  this  office, 
this  opportunity  of  doing  good,  will  he  their  reward.  The 
best  of  the  people  will  feel  rewarded  by  working  for  the 
good  of  the  people. — That  the  people  will,  perchance,  chose 
the  worst  demagogues,  those  flattering  and  corrupting  them, 
Marx  has  never  realized!  Tlie  best  men  and  women,  he 
thinks,  will  be  rewarded  by  being  called  to  govern.  That 
was  Plato's  dream,  too,  and  Moses'  belief,  too ;  yet  Socrates 
had  to  drink  the  hemlock  and  Korah  had  almost  supplanted 
Moses.  We  moderns  have  made  experience  enough,  care- 
fully studying  history,  that  the  people  will  select  those 
that  corrupt  and  exploit  them,  if  left  to  their  own  feelings; 
and  if  influenced,  their  choice  will  not  be  quite, so  bad,  but 
surely  not  the  best.  How,  then,  get  out  of  that  dilemma? 
Perhaps  by  indirect  selection;  choice  by  deputy. — Anyhow,, 
it  is  not  so  easy  to  tell. 

The  Socialistic  Ideal. 

Karl  Marx  believes  that  the  leaders  of  the  democracy 
will  soon  be  their  political  rulers — the  noblest  and  most 
unselfish  of  mankind.  They  will  make  the  laws  and  admin- 
ister them  to  the  satisfaction  of  all  parties  concerned. — 
Yes,  the  leaders  of  the  present  democracy  may  be  so.  But 
let  that  system  triumph,  and  you  will  have  a  crowd  of 
demagogues  and  camp-followers  yelling  with  the  crowd 
and  getting  their  own  nominations  and  sinecures. 


MARX's   DENUNCIATIONS.  123 

Curious  to  remark,  that,  witli  so  much  enthusiasm,  so 
much  faith  in  the  good  instincts  of  the  masses  and  the 
nobility  of  their  leaders,  Marx  is  a  materialist  of  tLe  most 
despairing  kind — no  God,  and  yet  an  ideal  man !  You  see,  he 
has  a  Hegelian  head  and  a  prophet's  heart;  there  is  no  God, 
but  there  is  the  Messiah  !  "  The  kingdom  of  heaven  will 
dawn  upon  earth,"  though  there  is  no  heaven.     .     .     . 

He  believes  that  democracy  is  now  coming  to  the  front. 
Democracy,  he  claims,  has  now  the  helm  of  government.  It 
is  changing  monarchical,  aristocratic  and  plutocratic  rule  into 
the  rule  of  the  masses.  These  democratic  rulers,  indeed,  are 
now  but  proletarians,  carpet-baggers ;  but  once  they  are  well 
established  in  power  and  have  changed  politics,  they  will 
soon  change  economics,  too.  By  what  means?  Violence 
and  confiscation,  as  advised  by  Bakunin  and  tried  by 
Babeuf?  Marx  answers :  "By  the  slow  process  of  evolu- 
tion," viz :  Society  will  find  out  that  it  must  change  its 
system  from  slave  and  wage-labor  to  collective  socialistic 
labor  and  equal  distribution  of  profits;  that  it  must  do 
justice  to  the  laboring  masses,  now  pariahs  and  dynamiters, 
or  perish.  That  he  proves  in  this  manner :  The  present 
system  of  wage-labor  is  but  one  century  old,  and  already  it 
has  drawn  the  State  into  the  straits  of  plutocracy  and 
pauperism.  Infinite  vice,  idleness  and  luxuriousness  on 
one  side,  and  on  the  other,  wretched  poverty,  lack  of  educa- 
tion, coarse  crime  and  vice,  and  dangerous  dissatisfaction. 

Marx's  Denunciations. 

Again  that  system  ruins  not  only  rich  and  poor,  but  even 
work  itself.  For  competition  is  commanding  cheap  labor 
and  cheap  goods,  at  the  price  of  beauty,  taste  and  strength. 
Next  it  ruins  the  moral  sense  of  all,  each  thinking  only  of 
himself,  all  society  being  rivals  and  enemies.  Already  it 
shows  signs  of  threatening  danger;  the  Damocles  sword  is 
hanging  over  the  heads  of  society,  with  its  wars  of  nations,^ 


124  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

classes  and  masses,  races  and  countries,  its  anarchy,  confu- 
sion and  insecurity  for  all,  even  the  strongest  and  wealthiest. 
Again  he  shows  that  the  small  agriculturist,  tradesman  and 
laborer,  once  fairly  happy  with  their  lot,  have  been  crushed 
out  by  the  capitalist.  Soon,  the  capitalist  has  been  so  by 
the  great  capitalist,  and  this  one  in  his  turn  is  so  by  the 
great  companies,  which  will  be  absorbed  by  the  State,  at 
last.  Again,  our  gigantic,  modern  improvements  in  agri- 
culture and  industry,  with  huge  factories,  machines,  steam, 
etc.,  require  things  to  be  done  all  on  a  grand  scale.  The 
former  individual  worker  can  now  no  longer  successfully 
■compete.  Small  producers  and  individual  workers,  as  of 
old,  become  less  and  less  possible.  All  is  now  centralized, 
all  done  on  a  grand  scale,  or  crushed  out  by  the  huge  com- 
binations. Even  these  huge  companies  are  often  crippled 
by  rivalry.  They  over-produce  and  over-stock  the  market 
and  starve  each  other  by  over-production,  and  by  undersell- 
ing. As  a  man  dies  by  over-feeding,  so  they  by  creating 
too  much  wealth,  hj  plethora.  To  save  themselves,  they,  at 
last,  are  compelled  to  agree  upon  some  equitable  plan,  good 
for  all,  by  union.  Just  that  is  what  Socialism  drives  at. 
Slowly  it  will  supplant  individual  labor  and  individual 
capital,  with  their  soulless  envy  and  competition,  with 
fraud  and  anxiety,  etc.,  by  collective  labor  and  collective 
capital.  Slowly  it  will  include  the  entire  State,  with  all  its 
individuals,  thus  avoiding  both  bad  work  and  competition, 
making  each  do  the  best  for  all,  and  yielding  him  or  her  a 
fair  share  in  the  profits.  This  is  the  noble  ideal  of 
Socialism. 

Democracy,  Inventions  and  Socialism. 

Mankind  thus  expects  its  regeneration,  its  emancipation, 
the  solution  of  the  great  social  question  by  a  combination 
of  the  great  social  factors,  viz :  Democracy,  Inventions  and 
Socialism.    By  Voltaire's  and  Rousseau's  doctrines  of  f rater- 


PARALLELS  AND  CONTRASTS.  125 

nity  and  equality  for  all  on  one  hand,  and  on  the  other  by 
England's  industrial  inventions,  combined  with  lands,  tools 
and  capital  belonging  to  the  State,  the  State  controlling  all 
labor,  and  dividing  its  profits  equitably  among  all,  with  no 
difference  of  creed,  race,  sex  or  country ;  all  nations  to  be 
sister-nations;  all  men  brothers — what  a  noble  idealism? 
What  a  breadth  of  thought,  embracing  the  globe  and  man- 
kind in  one  mighty  bond  of  justice  and  love  to  all !  Marx 
is  a  son  of  the  prophets.  His  ideal  heart  and  his  vast  brain 
show  it. 

Parallels  and  Contrasts  in  Bible  and  Socialism. 

We  started  with  the  proposition  that  the  Bible  has  noth- 
ing to  do  with  communism,  or  that  cruder  form  of  socialism, 
as  tried  by  anarchists  in  bygone  times,  from  Catiline  to 
Babeuf  and  the  Chicago  Haymarket  tragedy.  But  the 
Bible  has  a  great  deal  to  do  with  its  higher  and  nobler 
evolution,  now  termed  Social  Democracy.  Nay,  I  may  say 
that  many  of  the  noblest  aspirations  of  the  latter,  grew 
out,  perhaps  unconsciously,  of  the  prophetic  ideal  about 
State  and  Society. 

Social  democracy,  in  its  above-mentioned  Gotha  manifesto 
of  1875,  aspires  to  a  commonwealth  "where  everything 
belongs  to  the  community  and  all  its  members ;  land,  tools, 
capital  and  labor,  by  equal  right,  all  bound  to  work,  and  all 
to  share,  according  to  their  reasonable  wants."  This  pro- 
gramme is  entirely  biblical.  Mosaism  declares:  '-Mine 
are  the  children  of  Israel;  they  cannot  be  enslaved."  "Thy 
brother,  hired  out  for  six  years,  thou  shalt  not  crush  under 
hard  labor." (^) — "Mine  is  the  soil;  ye  are  but  its  tenants. 
Ye  shall  not  sell  it  for  ever." — On  the  Jubilee  the  family-lot 
and  the  family-house  shall  be  restored  to  the  original 
owner. — "  Thou  shalt  take  no  interest  on  money  nor  profit 
upon  any  goods  of  thy  brother." — "  Ye  shall  not  press  nor 


126  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

over-reacli  each  other." — But  the  Mosaic  system  has  the 
advantage  over  socialism  in  giving  to  each  definitely  his 
portion,  for  himself  and  his  posterity.  Thus,  it  makes  him 
interested  in  the  improvement  of  his  acre,  he  providing 
by  it  for  himself  and  his  descendants.  It  is  not  Utopian  in 
its  propositions.  It  proceeds  slowly  from  experience  to 
experience.  It  proceeds  with  less  startling  innovations? 
and,  hence,  it  is  much  surer  of  practical  success.  The 
entangling  socialistic  scheme  of  having  everything  turned 
over  to  the  State,  and  then  the  State  to  become  the  treas- 
urer of  all  the  wealth,  the  superintendent  of  all  the  work, 
the  sole  enterpreneur  and  employer,  the  sole  distributor  of 
labor  and  emolument  to  the  communal  members,  renders 
the  system  hazardous  and  hard  of  execution,  problematic 
and  Utopian,  perhaps  never  to  be  realized. 

Social  democracy  demands  the  surrender  of  all  lands  and 
of  most  of  movable  property  to  the  State.  It  asks  the 
surrender,  too,  of  the  citizen's  individual  work,  talent, 
inclination,  taste,  etc.,  to  the  good  judgment  of  the  State. 
How  sliall  that  be  realized?  since  every  one,  possessing 
anything,  inherited  or  acquired,  naturally  clings  to  it.  By 
confiscation  ?  That  is  doubtful  justice  or  wisdom,  and  will 
bring  on  discontent  and  social  war.  How  else,  then  ?  By 
slow  compromise?  But  the  urgent  necessity  of  satisfying 
the  starving,  threatening  masses!  That  is  a  long  road 
to  travel  by  and  very  precarious.  To  begin  with  tearing 
down  the  well-tried  house  and  build  up,  perhaps,  a  castle 
in  the  air !  What  do  we  know  how  that  exceedingly  com- 
plicated system  would  work?  Compromise  will  need  five 
centuries ;  but  the  masses  won't  wait. — The  Bible  contrived 
something  plainer,  quicker,  safer,  less  drawing  upon  the 
imagination,  viz :  The  equal  distribution  of  the  chief  capi- 
tal of  those  times,  land ;  leaving  ail  other  things,  as  efltort, 
taste,  inclination,  acquisition,  competition,  etc.,  a  private 
matter,   all   tempered  with   sympathy.      It   enjoined    the 


PARALLELS  AND  CONTRASTS.  127 

descent  of  land,  peremptorily,  to  posterity,  prohibiting 
rigorously  all  land  speculation  and  grabbing,  thus  erecting 
a  dam  and  bulwark  against  plutocracy  and  pauperism,  land- 
lordism and  serfdom.  Of  the  two  schemes,  I  think  the 
biblical  one  the  less  hazardous  and  more  realistic,  pretty 
well  calculated  for  primitive  conditions  and  mode^st  claims, 
where  every  one  was  content  to  live  "  under  his  vine  and 
his  fig  tree." 

Socialistic  democracy  desires  a  State  without  a  despot, 
ruling  classes  and  serving  masses,  no  proletarians,  no  pau- 
pers, no  inequality,  no  exploitation  and  no  exceptional  laws- 
It  acknowledges  a  brotherhood  of  peoples  and  of  men,  the 
equality  of  the  sexes  and  races.  All  that  is  biblical;  it  is 
Mosaic  and  New  Testamentary.  The  Bible  began  with 
nothing.  Later,  even  when  it  admitted  a  ruler,  he  was  to 
be  a  ''Ir other,''  not  a  despot,  without  seraglio,  exorbitant 
wealth  and  a  standing  army. 

Social  democracy  labors  with  might  and  main  to  elimi- 
nate the  "  iron  law  of  wages.''  Such  a  "law  "  was  not  in  the 
biblical  state,  nor  was  there  any  remedy  necessary  against 
it,  for  every  one  had  his  own  house  and  acre.  There  were 
few,  if  any,  baronial  planters,  grand  industrials,  etc.,  and  no 
opportunity  to  leave  one's  own  workshop  and  crowd  into 
factories,  with  bad  air,  immorality  and  slavery;  each 
worked  on  his  own  farm,  adding  occasionally  one  or  two 
"hand  laborers."  Very  few  had  work  and  wages  where- 
with to  buy  off  their  neighbor's  liberty  or  morality.  Boaz, 
cultivating  a  large  farm,  and  Nabal,  master  of  many  flocks, 
were  the  rare  exceptions,  and  their  "hands"  were  slaves, 
no  doubt. 

Socialistic  democracy  demands  State  help  for  grand 
socialistic  industries,  slowly  to  form  one  unique  State- 
industry,  with  all  the  citizens  crowding  into  its  workshops. 
This  is  depriving  each  citizen  of  his  individual  inclination^ 
judgment,  initiative  and  stimulant  for  effort.     This  policy 


128  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

is  very  problematic.  We  may  form  in  that  way  good  tools^. 
but  the  tools  may  prove  poor  individuals.  We  may  estab- 
lish in  that  manner  good  workshops,  but  create  a  poor 
community. 

That  may  cost  mankind  half  of  its  men  of  genius  and 
talent.  The  great  aim  of  society  is  to  build  up  solid  and 
noble  citizens. — Industry  must  be  subordinate  to  it.  The 
Bible  needed  no  such  contrivance.  It  left  every  man  to 
his  native  initiative,  yet  preventing  competition  from 
becoming  mischievous.  It  rather  allowed  emulation,  not 
competition. 

Social  Democracy  demands  universal  suffrage,  direct  leg- 
islation, no  exceptional  laws,  no  privileges,  and  no  discrimi- 
nation of  race,  creed,  sex  or  class.  It  insists  on  one  simple, 
progressive  income  tax;  no  standing  armies,  but  military 
duty  for  all.  All  that  is  literally  Mosaic.  According  to 
the  Bible,  the  people  consented  to  each  and  all  the  laws. 
That  is  expressly  propounded  by  Moses  and  emphasized  by 
Joshua ;  there  was  one  law  for  classes  and  masses,  one  for 
native  and  stranger;  no  legal  discrimination  against  whom- 
soever. The  categories,  "priests,"  {''Colianim,")  "Levites'' 
and  "Israelites"  had  an  ecclesiastical  bearing,  not  a  civil 
or  lay  one.  They  intermarried,  interchanged  professions 
and  trades;  had  no  castes,  no  privileges  and  no  restric- 
tions. Many  a  public  teacher,  many  a  Synhedrist  or  Sena- 
tor, was  by  trade  a  shoemaker  or  carpenter,  a  smith,  a 
weaver,  a  physician.  There  wa&  impartial  and  free  justice 
in  Judsea;  no  standing  armies  and  no  pretorian  guards;  no 
dynasties  by  "divine  descent,"  no  noble  "blue  blood,"  and 
no  extravagant  display  of  loyalty  to,  nor  adoration  of,  king 
or  high  priest.  There  was  but  one  tax  from  the  produce  of 
the  soil  and  the  flocks ;  a  direct  income  tax,  levied  without 
harshness,  rather  voluntarily  prompted  by  mere  conscience. 

Socialistic  Democracy  declares  for  international  solidarity 
of  the  peoples  and  for  the  brotherhood  of  mankind.    Hence 


PARALLELS  AND  CONTRASTS.  129 

comes  their  personal  freedom  and  social  equality.  Hence 
their  right  to  share  in  all  the  boons  and  the  wealth  of 
nature.  This  principle,  the  grandest  and  noblest  idea  of 
Socialism,  hails  directly  from  the  Bible.  Hindooism, 
Egypt,  Greece  and  Rome  knew  it  not;  the  Bible  did. 
It  lacks,  unfortunately,  in  Socialism  a  firm  basis  and 
all  substantiation,  though  the  entire  system  hinges  upon 
it ;  for  the  Socialistic  leaders  are  materialists,  and  mate- 
rialism yields  no  standing  room  for  solidarity  and  brother- 
hood; Monotheism  does.  That  all  men  are  free  and  equal 
and  entitled  to  happiness,  culture  and  bread — how  will  you 
prove  it  from  the  standpoint  of  materialism  ?  Is  there  free- 
dom in  nature  ?  Are  children  born  equal  ?  Does  not  the 
stronger  and  the  more  cunning  rule  in  nature?  You  build 
upon  the  ideal  goodness  of  man,  his  sympathy,  his  altruism, 
— are  these  to  be  found  in  brute  nature  ? 

The  materialists  repudiate  the  God-ideal  and  deny  the 
divine  Providence  which  made  right  slowly  supersede 
might,  commanded  virtue  supernaturally,  or  ordained  it 
primordially,  in  the  deep  essence  of  things,  having  fitted 
our  instincts  and  our  interests  for  virtue  and  goodness. 
These  ideas  they  rule  out,  and  yet  they  hope  for  them  and 
postulate  them  as  their  corner-stone!  No,  these  ideas  and 
aspirations  are  pieces  of  mosaic,  taken  over  from  Mosaism, 
blocks  of  stone,  hewn  from  the  biblical  quarries,  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testament,  the  two  breasts  whereat  you 
Socialists  first  sucked  in  your  humanity ;  they  remained, 
unconsciously,  at  the  bottom  of  your  hearts,  to  serve  now  as 
the  needed  foundation  of  your  system,  otherwise,  hanging 
in  the  air.  You  see,  materialism  is  no  base  for  the  old  nor 
the  new  system.  You  can  build  up  no  humanity  without 
idealism,  and  idealism  is  the  offspring  of  the  God-belief. 

A  profane  wit  once  remarked :    "The  Mosaic  religion  is  a 
religious  mosaic."     That  is  good  enough  for  a  witticism,  not 
for  truth.     The  unprejudiced  student  can  not  but  admire 
9 


130  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  adamantine  solidity  of  that  legislation.  Created  by  a 
man  or  a  school,  during  a  lifetime  or  centuries,  we  cannot 
help  admitting  that  there  is  one  set  of  principles  running 
through  its  many,.varied  books,  from  Pentateuch  to  Chroni- 
cles, from  beginning  to  end,  making  it  one  grand,  harmo- 
nious whole,  all  answering  the  legislator's  purpose,  viz  :  the 
establishing  of  "  a  Tcingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation^ 
The  entire  work  is  growing  out  of  one  piece  as  an  antique 
monolith,  or  as  the  "golden  chandelier  in  the  Temple." 
Look  how  the  Bible  is  solidly  consistent,  without  being 
less  rational  for  that.  It  starts  the  world  and  the  State 
with  its  God-idea :  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  Heaven 
and  earth."  (Genesis  1, 1.) — "I  am  the  Eternal  who  liberated 
thee  from  Egypt."  (Exodus  20,  1.) — Thus  is  He  the  very 
corner-stone  of  the  entire  social  structure.  He  delivered  his 
people  from  oppression,  gave  it  freedom,  a  country,  lands 
and  laws,  freely  accepted  by  it.  He  is  a  "  Holy  One." — 
"  He  is  not  to  be  bribed  or  intimidated  "  by  "  king  or  priest." 
— "He  is  the  holy  Being,"  hence  shall  his  people  be  holy 
(III.  M.  19,  1.) — This  very  same  chapter  gives  the  definition 
of  its  grand  opening  verse,  viz :  "  To  he  holy,'^  means  to  be 
moral,  just  and  educated,  chaste,  forgiving,  sober,  merciful 
and  charitable. — All  the  biblical  peoples,  with  all  mankind, 
spring  from  one  parent  couple ;  hence  are  they  brothers ! 
All  equal  and  all  free ;  hence  shall  the  weak,  the  women, 
the  children,  the  poor  stranger,  etc.,  be  treated  with  mercy 
and  forbearance. — Property  is  sacred,  chastity  is  holy,  hence 
the  sacredness  of  marriage  and  parenthood ;  hence  "  Honor 
thy  father  and  thy  mother." — "  Love  thy  neighbor  as  thy- 
self."— "Love  the  stranger  as  thyself." — Hence  the  New 
Testament.  "  Love  thy  enemy  as  thyself ;  if  he  insults 
thee,  pardon  him ;  if  he  strikes  thee,  disarm  him  by  meek- 
ness; if  he  robs  thee,  rather  give  him  more." — A  trifle, 
perhaps,  too  lofty  for  man  as  he  is.  Yet  it  is  a  noble  ideal 
of  goodness  and  meekness,  yea,  even  of  prudence.     It  is 


MARX,    SON    OF   THE    PROPHETS.  181 

good  and  worthy  of  a  man  who  dies  for  what  he  thinks  to 
be  right. 

Now  whilst  social  democracy  is  aspiring  to  an  ideality 
even  greater  than  that  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament, 
postulating  unselfishness  and  self-sacrifice,  not  as  an  excep- 
tion, but  as  the  rule,  as  the  daily  habit  and  nature  of  each 
and  every  man,  it,  nevertheless,  rules  out  God  and  worship, 
providence,  marriage  and  family!  Yet  these  latter  ones 
are  perfectly  compatible  with  reason,  and  at  the  same  time 
give  the  human  state  a  firmer  base  than  socialism  has  ever 
contrived.  Materialism  is  a  poor  background  for  a  State 
based  on  morality  and  ideality.  I  am  afraid  materialism 
rather  suits  despotism  and  coercive  duty,  controlled  by  a 
tyrant. 

Marx,  Son  of  the  Prophets. 

As  in  Spinoza's  system  we  recognize  its  best  elements  to 
have  come  from  early  educational  impressions,  from 
Bible,  prophets,  mystics  and  philosophers,  whilst  its  sad 
aspects  were  derived  from  strange  sources :  even  so  in  the 
system  of  Karl  Marx  we  perceive  how  his  best  political 
material,  his  broad  humanity,  his  noble  social  solidarity, 
his  deep,  thrilling  sympathy  with  human  woes,  his  great 
anxiety  and  bold  initiative  to  remedy  them,  were  imbibed 
with  his  mother's  milk,  drawn  at  the  breast  of  Moses  and 
the  prophets;  whilst  the  weaker  points  of  his  system,  the 
denying  of  any  and  every  religious  ideal,  of  any  Providence 
working  deep  in  the  bowels  of  nature,  his  abandoning  all 
divine  piety  and  family  piety,  all  worship  and  all  churches 
as  exploded  theories  and  effete  institutions,  yet  asking,  at 
the  same  time,  all  the  noble  virtues  cultivated  through 
them,— disclose  spiritualism  and  materialism,  inconsistently 
yoked  together. — Having  learned  from  Hegel  self-deifica- 
tion, he  needs  no  higher  ideal.  His  brain  is  his  Sinai. 
Yet,  Prometheus-like,  he  feels  the  vulture  of  doubt  gnaw- 


132  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

ing  at  his  vitals.  He  feels  tlie  urgent  need  of  a  base  for 
his  system,  and  accepts  man's  goodness  from  sheer  despair. 
',  That  reminds  us  of  Heine's  satirical  remark :  "  Kant  had 
first  destroyed  the  God-ideal  with  his  demonstrations  in  the 
'Theoretical  Reason.'  But  he  thought  ^Lampe  must  have 
an  ideal/  and  he  restored  it  in  his  'Practical  Reason.'" 
Even  so  Karl  Marx:  ''My  followers  must  have  faith  in 
human  goodness,  and  I  postulate  it  without  any  further 
proof."  He  claims  to  believe  in  evolution,  and  this  is  utterly 
incompatible  with  materialism.  Evolution  really  means: 
Things  are  so  primordially  arranged  that  the  wise  and  the 
just  will  and  must  slowly  succeed.  Whether  he  believes  it, 
or  only  claims  to  do  so,  is  hard  to  tell.  The  Bible  believes  in 
Providence,  and  bases  consistently  its  society  upon  it.  It 
can  claim  virtue  and  self-sacrifice  of  man, — because  there  is 
a  "holy  God." — And  why  not?  When  there  is  evolution^ 
must  there  not  he  Providence  f  When  there  is  primordially 
ordained  an  eternal  fitness  of  things,  must  there  not  be  a 
Providence  having  shaped  things  that  way?     .     .     . 

Socialism  and  Bible. 

We  have  seen  that  a  higher  evolution  of  Communism  is 
Socialism;  here  the  points  of  contact  with  the  biblical 
system  are  numerous,  and  the  contrasts  are  striking. 

The  Marx-Lasalle  Socialism  begins  with  declaring  for 
the  necessity  of  society  acquiring  all  lands,  instruments 
and  capital.  But  how  will  they  realize  that,  since  these 
lands,  instruments  and  capital  are  at  present  private  prop- 
erty ?  By  open  confiscation  ?  That  is  Communism  !  Marx 
and  Lasalle  as  yet  deprecate  that ;  Bakunin's  anarchy  and 
downright  spoliation  having  been  repudiated  by  them.  If 
so,  how,  then,  make  private  lands  and  capital  public  ? — The 
next  difficulty  is,  perhaps,  even  greater;  supposing  all 
belong  to  the  Socialistic  Democracy,  the  future  evolution 
of  society;  supposing  that  miracle  is  performed,  what  next? 


SOCIALISM    AND    BIBLE.  133 

The  social  leaders  will  inaugurate  associated  and  collective 
industries  for  the  general  benefit,  giving  to  each  a  share  of 
the  profits,  according  to  his  or  her  capacity  and  their 
reasonable  wants. — But  who  shall  be  the  judge  thereof? 
Again,  who  shall  determine  the  nature  and  the  amount 
of  the  vv-ork,  and  the  share  of  profits  or  the  "reason- 
ableness of  every  one's  wants  ? "  Who  will  be  judge 
and  ruler,  and  who  will  meekly  accept  the  role  of  the 
drudge,  with  the  poor  wage  of  such?  Arbiters?  Will 
there  not  be  heard  the  old  hue  and  cry  at  partiality  ?  Will 
the  drudges  abide  by  it?  Do  we  expect  the  arbiters  to  be 
angels  and  never  be  partial?  But  supposing  even  they 
would  be  angelt^,  and  treat  every  worker  "  according  to  his 
true  deserts,"  his  talents,  diligence  and  self-sacrifice ;  "Who 
will  then  escape  a  whipping?  " — to  speak  with  Shakespeare 
— "If  the  greater  merit  will  have  a  larger  share,  and  the 
humbler  talents  a  smaller  one,  what  have  we  gained  by 
Socialism?"  We  shall  again  have  the  old  competition, 
crusliing  competition,  which  was  expected  to  be  elimi- 
nated in  the  future  Socialistic  Democracy !  Or  should 
we  follow  out  the  hints  of  some  other  socialistic  ideal- 
ists and  assume  the  utopia  that  all  workers  should, 
be  treated  alike,  all  fed,  housed,  dressed,  etc.,  alike,  as  in 
old  Sparta — and  that  we  should  reward  merit  only  by  a  civic 
wreath,  only  by  an  honorable  recognition  of  public  services, 
by  enrollment  into  a  democratic  "legion  of  honor?" — How 
many  such  self-sacrificing  men  and  women,  for  the  sake  of 
philanthropy,  can  we  reasonably  expect?  Will  not  the 
vast  majority  of  usual  commonplace  people  prefer  doing  as 
little  as  possible,  and  declare  to  be  "  ladies  and  gentlemen," 
having  many  wants,  but  little  inclination  for  hard  work? 
No  doubt  there  are  a  few  select  persons  who  are  happy  in 
doing  good  deeds  for  society's  sake,  with  few  needs  to 
sustain  life;  but  the  vast  majority  of  mortals  are  just  the 
contrary.    If  not  stimulated  by  hunger  and  want,  if  not  fired 


134  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

on  by  personal  advantages  and  substantial  emoluments, 
they  will  do  as  little  as  possible,  and  society  will  soon 
starve.  The  socialistic  scheme  is  expecting-,  therefore,  a 
second  miracle,  viz.,  that  all  people  should  become  ideals, 
and  do  the  most  and  best  work  for  philanthropy's  sake. — 
May  it  not  be  utopian  ? 

And  the  biblical  scheme!  Three  tliousand  years  ago,  in 
the  hoary  past,  that  Mosaic  scheme  seems  to  have  been 
more  practical.  The  first  miracle,  it  needed  not.  The 
lawgiver  had  a  tabula-rasa  society  to  deal  witli,  whose 
members  were  nearly  equally  circumstanced.  Their  instru- 
ments of  labor  were  as  yet  in  his  own  hands,  God  being 
King.  He  divided  the  lands  fairly  among  the  citizens,  and 
provided  for  the  perpetual  maintenance  of  the  family-lot. 
He  thus  could  hope  to  have  put  a  barrier  against  accappa- 
rating  the  soil  by  a  few.  Each  cultivating  and  enjoying  his 
crops,  the  difficulty  of  distribution  was  avoided.  Nor  was 
there  allowed  internal  profitable  commerce,  or  external 
enriching  wars,  to  disturb  that  balance  of  wealth  among 
the  social  members.  Moses  kept,  therefore,  the  original 
economic  relations  of  the  wealth  of  his  community  pretty 
well  stationary.  Add  to  that  his  demanding  personal  liberty 
and  social  equality ;  add  his  grand,  ennobling,  weekly 
Sabbath  institution ;  his  frequent  Release-years,  with  their 
extinction  of  debts  ;  his  other  numerous  benevolent  statutes, 
tending  to  keep  up  the  feeling  of  solidarity  and  brother- 
hood among  the  nation;  add  his  entire  system,  identifying 
State,  religion  and  people,  permeating  and  fusing  each  with 
the  other,  without  any  fear  of  abuse;  adding  all  that,  we 
might  be  warranted  to  come  to  the  conclusion  that  his 
political  economy  system  had  many  chances  of  success,  at 
least  during  the  first  period  of  Ebrew  history,  if  ever  fairly 
put  on  trial.  For  the  circumstances  then  extant  (three 
thousand  years  ago)  it  was  vastly  superior  to  our  socialistic 
scheme.     All  capital  and  instruments  of  labor,  land  inclu- 


THE    8EPTENNATE.  135 

sive,  were  in  his  grasp.  Hence,  this  difficulty  did  not  exist 
for  him.  But  the  second  one — how  to  fairly  distribute  the 
profits  of  labor  among  the  workers — he  likewise  avoided  by 
giving  eacli  a  lot  to  cultivate  and  enjoy  its  fruit.  Everyone 
had,  therefore,  his  share  in  his  own  hands,  needing  thus  no 
arbitrators  and  avoiding  jealousy  and  discontent.  The 
family-lot  was  inalienable ;  it  remained  for  eve"r  and  ever 
to  the  descendants  of  the  original  owner,  or  rather  tenant. 
Hence,  it  operated  against  proletarianism.  No  one  ever 
was  born  absolutely  poor.  It  evaded  landlordism  by  giving 
no  food  for  land-grabbing,  absolute  acquisition  of  new  acres 
being  simply  impossible.  The  no  commerce  and  no-war 
policy,  stopping  all  avenues  of  suddenly  acquiring  or  losing 
wealth,  insured  the  average  economic  equality,  and,  hence, 
the  liberty  and  equality  of  all  was  never  undermined. 

The  Septennate. 

The  biblical  system  no  doubt  has  many  advantages.  It 
combines  the  old  and  the  new  State-ideas.  The  individual 
has  all  free  play,  yet  grasping  and  soulless  competition  is 
checked.  Work  and  emulation  are  stimulated  by  self- 
interest  and  emolument;  yet  there  is  room  left  for  every 
one's  efforts,  even  for  the  humbler  talents.  There  is  free- 
dom of  thrift  and  acquisition,  yet  these  are  kept  in  bounds 
by  the  fact  of  the  soil  being  stationary  and  inalienable,  and 
no  internal  commerce  or  depredatory  wars  being  allowed. 
The  unity  of  the  family,  of  the  nation  and  of  worship  is 
kept  up. — Society  rested  upon  idealism ;  superior  to  mate- 
rialism, to  a  shifting  family,  a  vague  internationalism, 
without  any  base  and  raison  d'etre,  those  three  pillars 
of  the  Socialistic  Society.  Imagine!  No  religion,  no  fixed 
family,  no  national  feeling,  and  yet  the  claim  of  the  fraternity 
of  mankind.  Yet  to  ask  of  one  to  work  and  toil  without 
any  personal  reward — for  goodness  sake,  for  philanthropy, 
for  the  love  of  humanity !     Materialism  and  self-sacrifice 


136  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

to  humanity  ?     We  should  therefore  incline  to  think  Karl 
Marx's  system  more  Utopian  than  the  Mosaic  one. 

Septennate  Never  Tried  Yet. 

Yet  many  drawbacks  are  in  the  way  of  suggesting  the 
Mosaic  social  democracy  for  our  times  and  our  circum- 
stances. For  would  present  mankind  ever  consent  to  the 
Judsean  simplicity,  poverty,  uniformity?  Could  we  ever 
think  of  breaking  our  soil  into  as  many  lots  as  male  citi- 
zens? Could  we  then  utilize  our  present  machines  and 
instruments  of  labor,  railways  and  steam  engines,  by  making 
each  laborer  work  for  his  own  account  ?  Or  shall  we  give 
up  our  fine  industries,  our  noble  arts,  our  grand  commerce, 
and  come  back  to  the  simplicity  of  Judaea  ?  Evidently  that 
would  be  retrogression.  Besides,  the  simple  fact  that  the 
biblical,  political  economy  never  was  tried,  may  be  a  fair 
presumption  that  even  in  antiquity  it  was  not  feasible. 
There  were  among  the  Talmudists  solid  thinkers,  men  not 
inferior  to  our  modern  economists  and  socialistic  leaders, 
full  of  philanthropy  and  sympathy  for  the  proletariat. 
When,  two  thousand  years  ago,  the  Herodian  policy,  or  the 
school  of  Hillel,  abolished,  stone  after  stone,  all  of  the  bib- 
lical economic  structure,  that  may  suggest  the  fair  pre- 
sumption that  the  system  seemed  not  realizable,  and  that 
conditions  had  altered  greatly,  at  least  under  the  rule  of 
the  Herodians,  the  slaves  of  the  Caesars.  Nevertheless, 
present  i)o]itical  economists  may  ponder  over  the  biblical 
way  of  solving  the  social  problem,  for,  anyhow,  there  may 
be  yet  many  elements  left,  if  not  the  entire  structure,  fit 
for  adaptation  to  our  evolving  society  of  the  present  time. 
Great  lawgivers  have  suggestions  in  store  even  for  late 
posterity. 


SABBATH    AND   THE    SOCIAL    QUESTIOX.  137 


SABBATH  AND  THE  SOCIAL  QUESTION. 

We  have  largely  spoken  of  tlie  Jubilee  and  the  Release- 
year-laws,  and  we  have  hinted  at  their  root  being  the  Bibli- 
cal Sabbath.  We  now  come  to  that  weighty  theme,  one  of 
the  most  important  traits  of  Mosaism,  slowly  developing 
through  the  Gospels  and  Islam  into  an  institution  of  the 
grandest  dimensions.  Well,  that  Sabbath  forms  the  basis  of 
the  Jubilee  and  the  Release-year. 

What  is  the  Sabbath  f  A  symbol,  a  sacrament,  a  cere- 
mony, religious  rite,  and  no  more?  Let  us  take  time 
and  elucidate  the  question;  it  may  prove  of  great  interest 
to  the  thoughtful. 

For  thousands  of  years  the  Ebrew  people  are  celebrating 
that  day;  for  nearly  fifteen  centuries  the  vast.  Christian 
world  does  the  same ;  and  for  six  hundred  years  the 
Mohammedan  world  has  adopted  it,  too.  Nay,  even 
Rationalists  and  non-Sectarians  recognize  its  necessity. 
The  German  Social  democrats  at  Gotha,  in  1875,  mentioned, 
too,  in  their  program  that  Rest-day  as  necessary  for  the 
welfare  of  the  workingman.  The  Sabbath  is  one  of  the 
great  traits  and  characteristics  of  the  Sinai-law ;  both  the 
Decalogues  enjoin  it  with  great  solemnity.  It  is  repeated 
a  hundred  times  in  Pentateuch,  Prophets,  etc.  It  is  termed  (^) 
the  "sign  of  the  Covenant,"  the  ''eternal  Covenant,"  be- 
tween God  and  his  people;  the  distinguishing  trait  of 
Monotheism  and  Mosaism,  tlie  flag  and  badge  of  that  ancient 
legislation  (II.  M.  31, 13-15.)  (■)  Humanely  considered,  what 
is  the  object  of  that  institution?  At  what  does  it  aim?  We 
said  it  is  the  symbol  of  Mosaism.  Well,  there  was  another 
symbol  for  Abraham,  i^)  and  still  another  for  Noah.  (*)  Is, 
then,  the  weekly  rest-day  of  no  greater  practical  import- 
ance than  these  two  last  mentioned  ?     Is  it  nothing  more 

.nL"p   (4)         .rh^n   (3)         -D^iy  nnn    i2)         .nn2  mx   d) 


138  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

than  a  sign  and  a  means  to  bring  home  to  the  votary  of 
Jahveh  some  certain  idea  of  consequence  ?  What  is  that 
idea?  The  Sabbath-commandment  is  most  frequently 
repeated  in  the  Pentateucli.  After  the  doctrine  of  the 
unity  and  immateriality  of  God,  the  strict  observance  of 
the  Rest-day  is  most  frequently  and  forcibly  enjoined  in 
Sacred  Writ,  especially  in  both  the  Decalogues.  And  all 
that  pomp  and  display  means  but  a  mere  sign^  a  symbol,  a 
sacrament?  Is  that  probable?  And  if  not,  what  else  is  the 
real  object  of  that  weekly  institution? 

The  l^iRLE  ox  the  Sabbath. 

In  order  to  be  enabled  to  fairly  answer  this  important 
question,  let  us  read  the  more  conspicuous  biblical  passages 
concerning  it.  (Gen.  II.,  1-3).  "  Thus  tlie  heavens,  the  earth 
and  all  their  hosts  were  finished,  etc ;  and  on  the  seventh 
day  God  had  accomplished  the  work  to  be  done  ;  and  He 
rested  on  the  seventh  day  and  sanctified  it." 

Shall  we  now  understand  that  the  Sabbath  institution  is 
contemporaneous  with  the  creation?  Is  it,  so  to  say,  the 
day  of  divine  rest  and  the  inauguration  of  the  world? 
Modern  science  cannot  be  satisfied  herewith.  Even  the 
Ebrew  Agada  does  not  take  it  literally.  See  Jalkut  thereto. — 
Next  let  us  read  {Exodus  20,  "8-11):  "Remember  the 
Sabbath  day  to  sanctify  it.  Six  days  shalt  thou  labor,  and 
the  seventh  day  is  a  rest  to  thy  God  .  .  .  for  in  six 
days  He  had  made  heaven  and  earth  and  rested  on  the 
seventh.  Therefore  he  blessed  the  Sabbath  day  and  sanc- 
tified it." 

Here  in  the  grandest  passage  of  S.  Script.,  the  Decalogue,. 
the  covenant  between  God  and  His  people,  the  constitution 
of  mankind,  the  corner-stone  of  human  civilization  ;  here, 
immediately  after  the  sublime  declaration  of  the  divine 
unity,  we  read  the  commandment  concerning  the  Rest-day, 
in  the  most  solemn  and  most  emphatic  manner.     And  this 


THE    BIBLE   ON    THK   SABBATH.  139^ 

apparently  refers  to  the  above  tradition  of  the  cosmogony  : 
"  For  in  six  days  God  created  heaven  and  earth  and  rested 
on  the  seventh  ;  therefore,  He  blessed  and  sanctified  it." 
(Hen.  II.,  2). — Which  the  Agada  correctly  takes  as  a  pream- 
ble to  the  Sabbath. 

Let  us  read  a  third  passage  on  the  subject  (Deut.  V.  12-16) : 
"Observe  the  Sabbatli  day  and  sanctify  it,  as  God  has 
bidden  thee,  etc.,  etc.,  that  thy  male  and  female-servants 
may  rest  like  thyself.  And  remember  that  thou  hast  been 
a  slave  in  Egypt,  etc.,  therefore,  God  bade  thee  to  have  gu 
Rest-day." — Here,  in  the  second  Decalogue,  we  find  in  the 
same  place,  with  the  same  solemnity  and  with  even  more 
circumstantiality,  the  commandments  bearing  on  our  sub- 
ject forcibly  repeated.  Yet  remark:  as  the  aim  and  reason 
therefor,  we  find  no  longer  the  cosmogonical  divine  rest 
after  the  six  days  creation,  but  the  practical,  human  object: 
''  that  thy  male  and  female  servants  may  rest  like  thyself," 
especially  remembering  the  Egyptian  slavery.  Here  we 
see  that  the  aim  is  not  mystic  and  supernatural,  but  entirely 
practical,  palpable,  humanitarian,  moral,  yea,  social  and 
political.— Plainer  yet  it  reads  in  11.  M.  23,  12  :  "  That  thy 
beast,  thy  slave  and  thy  stranger  may  rest  and  recreate 
themselves." 

These  passages  bearing  upon  our  question,  will  be  our 
guides  in  trying  to  ascertain  the  scope  of  the  legislation  in 
this  weekly  institution.  The  first  quotation  (Gen.  II,  2,) 
bases  the  Sabbatli  rest-day  upon  the  divine  rest  after  the 
six  creation  days.  Exactly  the  same  version  is  given  in  the 
secouji  quotation  (Kxod.  20,  ll.)^The  third  (Deut.  V,  15,) 
brings  in  two  new  factors  of  an  entirely  natural  and  human 
character,  viz:  the  rest,  the  re-creation  of  the  dependent 
enslaved  masses,  and  the  commemoration  of  the  exodus 
from  Egypt.  Finally,  the  fourth  passage  (in  Exod.  23,  12,) 
is  the  plainest,  setting  forth  the  aim  and  sense  of  the  law- 
giver in  the  simplest  terms,without  a  shadow  of  supernatural- 


140  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

ism,  viz:  The  re-creation  of  tlie  hard-working  people,  and 
the  sympathy  even  with  the  toiling  beast.  The  super- 
natural and  the  liistorical  motives  are  passed  by ;  the  physio- 
logical, the  political,  or  the  philanthroi)ical  one  is  set  forth 
with  all  desirable  plainness  and  simplicity.  It  is  this 
aspect  of  the  Sabbath  institution  which  interests  us  here, 
in  our  study  of  the  sociological  bearings  of  the  Bible  and 
its  legislation.  Let  us  closely  examine  these  texts  and 
endeavor  to  get  at  the  political  idea  of  the  legislator. 
Beginning  with  the  first :  "  God  had  finished  his  work  and 
he  rested  on  the  seventh  day,  and  he  blessed  that  day  and 
sanctified  it."  (I.  M.  2,  2.) — Speaking  here  of  tbe  Bible  from 
the  legislative  standpoint,  we  are  not  called  upon  to  treat 
of  these  words  in  their  literal  sense  and  as  matters  of  fact. 
That  is  the  domain  of  theology.  The  historian  has  another 
range  of  thought,  having  seen  that  even  the  Agada  takes 
them  as  but  a  poetical  substantiation  of  the  Sabbath,  insti- 
tuted at  a  later  time. 

The  second  Decalogue  gives,  moreover,  as  the  aim  of  the 
Sabbath-day,  the  remembrance  of  the  event  of  the  exodus 
from  Egyi)t.  Is  this  to  be  taken  literally?  Is  the  Rest- 
day  a  commemoration  of  Ebrew  national  independence, 
.a  kind  of  weekly  Passover?  Who  can  be  in  earnest  with 
this  acceptation?  Who  ever  brought  the  Sabbath  in  histor- 
ical connection  with  Egypt?  Do  we  not,  so  to  say, 
intuitively  feel  that  our  verses  in  Genesis,  Exodus  and 
Deuteronomy  must  be  understood  in  their  deeper  sense? 

Talmud  and  Philosophers  on  the  Sabbath. 

Rabbinical,  as  well  as  modern,  thinkers  contrived  many 
other  explanations,  perfectly  well  worth  looking  at.  Some 
said :  The  Sabbath  is  an  institution  in  memory  of  the 
world's  creation;  that  the  world  was  created  and  had  a 
beginning;  by  God,  alone  uncreated,  alone  without  begin- 
ning, free-willed  and  self-conscious. 


TALMUD    AND   PHILOSOPHERS   ON   THE   SABBATH.  141 

Thus,  these  Rabbinical  philosophers  think  Sabbath  to  be 
a  kind  of  demonstration  in  favor  of  the  transcendental, 
spiritual,  Mosaic  God,  in  contra-distinction  from  the  Pan- 
theistic conception  of  Deity,  identical  with  or  inherent  in 
the  world.  We  feel  how  little  interest  such  abstract  ques- 
tions, such  abstruse  speculations,  offer  to  the  mass  of  the 
people.  Is  it  possible,  then,  that  the  great  lawgiver  should 
create  an  institution  of  such  magnitude,  for  all  eternity, 
and  such  practical  bearings,  with  an  abstract,  philosophical 
object  in  view?  With  no  other  aim,  indeed,  than  to  favor 
one  philosophical  system  and  protest  against  another  one? 
Where  do  we  find  Moses  so  anxious  about  abstract  ideas  and 
opinions  which  never  had  any  practical  influence  upon  the 
people?  There  is  another  theory  in  store  on  our  subject, 
viz:  Some  modern  philanthropists  believe  Sabbath  to  be  a 
kind  of  sanctification  of  labor^  a  protest  against  the  con- 
tempt of  work,  so  prevalent  in  antiquity.  But  how  should 
an  injunction  for  rest,  absolute  abstention  from  work,  have 
for  its  aim  the  rehabilitation  of  labor?  To  honor  labor  by 
commanding  rest?  I  have  to  call  attention  to  one  circum- 
stance more.  I  mentioned  before  how  often,  how  circum- 
stantially and  emphatically  the  Rest-day  is  repeated.  The 
lawgiver  spares  no  means  of  impressing  it  upon  the  physi- 
ognomy of  his  system.  He  designates  it  as  his  special  sign. 
He  punishes  its  transgression  with  death.  He  places  it  in 
the  Decalogue,  the  great  essence  of  the  Pentateuch.  Now, 
look  at  the  commandments  contained  in  that  Decalogue. 
Each  and  all  of  them  are  plain,  practical,  real,  urgently 
necessary  for  the  salvation  of  every  civilized  people  and 
every  rational  being.  There  is  in  it  nothing  mystical, 
nothing  supernatural,  hardly  even  dogmatical.  For  the 
declaration  of  the  divine  unity  itself  is  so  rational,  so  self- 
evident,  that  it  is  rather  a  principle  of  reason  and  senti- 
ment than  of  creed.  Why,  then,  should  the  Sabbath  alone 
make  an  exception — Sabbath  alone,  out  of  all  the  Ten  Words, 


142  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

be  of  a  mystical  or  symbolical  nature?  Whilst  the  entire 
Decalogue  is  its  own  object  and  aim,  the  Rest-day  alone 
should  be  but  the  means  for  some  end,  should  be  but  a  sign 
■or  sacrament.     Is  that  probable  ? 

Let  us  mention  yet  the  following  commentators  and 
thinkers  on  the  subject:  Philo  (Decalog.,  758)  finds  in  the 
Sabbath  the  teachings :  "  Ever  to  imitate  the  divine  Creator. 
As  He  worked  for  six  days  and  rested  on  the  seventh,  so,  too, 
must  we  do."  That  doctrine  of  work  and  rest  is  perfectly 
congenial  to  human  nature,  not  to  the  divine  one. — Even  Ezra 
finds  in  it  a  hint  that :  "  Six  days  we  shall  devote  to  the  needs 
of  the  body,  and  work,  and  the  seventh  to  spiritual  culture."— 
Maimon.  (  More,  Neb.  III.,  343 )  is  even  more  positive  and 
plain-spoken :  "  It  is  a  day  set  apart  for  the  rest,  recreation 
and  happiness  of  men." — Albo  (in  Ikk.  III.,  26)  takes  it  as 
*'a  symbol  of  the  creation  by  God,  of  the  exodus,  or  freedom 
of  Israel  and  of  Revelation." — With  the  ideas  of  a  sanctified 
Sabbath  and  of  freedom,  modern  commentators  and  thinkers 
penetrate  deeper  into  the  profound  meaning  of  the  institu- 
tion, viz  :  It  is  a  day  set  apart  by  divine  Providence  for 
the  bodily,  mental,  moral  and  spiritual  welfare  of  man ;  a 
day  devoted  to  bodily  rest  and  cheer,  to  moral  improve- 
ment, mental  culture  and  spiritual  elevation ;  it  is  a  soaring 
up  to  a  higher  existence,  a  liberation  from  the  earthly 
drudgery  and  cares  to  spiritual  freedom.  Dr.  Hamburger 
summarizes  thus:  " It  is  the  symbol  of  man's  likeness  to 
the  Deity  in  freedom  and  holiness.  As  God  is  the  ever- 
a«'tive  Creator,  yet  ever-free  Master  of  the  universe,  never 
absorbed  by  his  work, — even  so  should  man  neither  be  the 
slave  of  nature  nor  its  contemner,  but  work  in  full  freedom 
for  his  own  development,  and  neither  flee  the  world,  as  does 
the  Hindoo,  nor  be  absorbed  by  it,  as  the  ancient  Greek." — 
This  interpretation  is  interesting  for  a  metaphysician — not  for 
Moses,  it  is  ingenious  and  pretty,  but  it  is  too  metaphysical 
for  a  practical  institution. — Others   take   Sabbath   for  an 


NUMBER   SEVEX.  143 

expiatory  sacrifice,  ( Ewald ) — or  to  stem  human  greed, 
(Knobel) — or  as  a  corrective  against  moral  defects  deriving 
from  worldly  activity,  (Keil) — or  as  bearing  most  usefully 
upon  health,  morality,  family,  etc.,  (Proudhon)— Midrash 
Tanchuma  (Kithisa)  declares  :  "  The  Sabbath  alone  is  of  as 
much  weight  as  the  entire  Thora." — Michilta  to  III.  M.  20, 
takes  it  as  the  symbol  of  the  divine  creation, — Talmud, 
Cholin  2,  states :  "  Who  desecrates  the  Sabbath  is  just  as 
bad  as  he  who  denies  the  entire  law." — Treatise  (Talmud) 
Sabbath  is  entirely  consecrated  to  that  subject.  The  work 
prohibited  on  it  is  divided  by  the  Rabbis  into  thirty-nine 
chief  kinds,  and  many  more  subordinate  ones,  denominated 
"  Aboth  and  Toldoth." — Art  is  mostly  allowed,  yet  later 
again  it  was  prohibited.  In  the  ancient  Temple-service  the 
necessary  work  was  allowed  on  that  day.  So  was  lighting 
fires  there. — To  avoid  danger,  work  is  allowed.  So  it  was 
during  the  Maccabean  wars.  "  The  Sabbath  is  given  unto 
you,  not  you  to  the  Sabbath,"  is  a  Rabbinical  saying,  later 
quoted  in  the  New  Testament. — In  the  Jewish  wars  against 
Rome,  there  was  discriminated  between  offensive  and  de- 
fensive warfare,  the  latter  alone  being  allowed.  The  "  Chas- 
sidim"  sect  rather  died  than  worked  thereon. — In  Joshua, 
Judges  and  Samuel,  there  is  no  nientioning  of  the  Sabbath. 
In  Isaiah,  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  there  is.  From  the  second 
Jewish  Empire  to  the  present  days,  it  was  a  leading  feature 
in  the  Synagogue  and  Ebrew  home  life. — According  to 
elosephus  (Contra  Apion  II.,  39),  many  Greeks,  Romans  and 
Barbarians  imitated  the  Sabbath-rest.  Seneca  complains 
that  this  was  the  case  (Seneca  III.,  427). 

Number  Seven. 

The  sacred  number  of  the  Bible  is  seven ;  be  it  because 
the  ancient  computation  was  the  four  phases  of  the  lunar 
montli,  or  the  seven  days  of  creation,  including  the  divine 
rest;    or  on    account   of   the   sun,  moon    and    five  visible 


144  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

stars.  Whatever  the  reason  may  be,  seven  underlies  all 
sacred  enumeration.  The  seventh  day  is  the  rest-day,  con- 
secrated to  God.  The  seventh  month,  Tishre,  is  the  sacred 
holiday-epoch.  There  are  seven  holidays  in  the  year. 
Passover  and  Tabernacles  have  seven  days  each.  In  seven 
weeks  is  harvest  time  and  Pentecost.  The  seventh  year  is 
Release-year,  and  seven  such  ^eptennates  make  a  Jubilee. 
The  festive  sacrifices  were  seven.  Seven  branches  were  in 
the  chandelier;  such  were  the  sprinklings  and  the  purifica- 
tion days  in  the  Temple ;  such  are  yet  the  wedding  week  and 
the  mourning  week,  each  of  seven  days,  etc.,  eitc.  Seven 
became  slowly  a  solemn  afiarmation ;  to  take  an  oath  is  in 
Ebrew  expressed  by  a  word  meaning :  "  make  seven."  As 
the  Greeks  swore  by  three :  Orcus,  Styx  and  Hades ;  or  by 
Zeus,  Apollo  and  Athene,  so  the  old  Semites  by  seven ;  the 
Christians  by  Trinity  or  cross,  and  the  later  Judseans  by  one 
(God).  The  claim  that  the  biblical  Sabbath  is  but  a  rem- 
nant from  the  hoary  Saturn  or  luna-cult,  is  futile.  In 
neither  was  it  a  day  for  sanctification,  rest,  freedom  or  ele- 
vation. In  the  Saturn  worship  it  was  accounted  an  unlucky 
day.  It  was  the  first  of  the  week,  not  the  last.  It  may  be 
older  than  the  Sinai-epoch,  but  it  is  the  Bible  that  made  it 
what  it  is  :  a  day  of  liberation  for  man  «and  beast,  of  leisure, 
recreation  and  elevation  for  all,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter. 

Survey  of  Sabbath  m  History. 

In  order  to  find  the  key  to  that  labyrinth  of  opinions, 
sayings  and  theories,  old  or  new,  let  us  refer  to  positive 
history ;  let  us  look  soberly,  impartially,  and  closely  to  the 
institution  itself.  When  we  examine  the  numerous  Sab- 
bath-verses, especially  the  Manna  passage,  Exodus  16,  26, 
we  find  there,  plainly  stated,  that  the  Sabbath  was  known 
to  the  Ebrews  before  the  Sinai  proclamation ;  known,  if  not 
fully  observed.  Now,  more  than  three  thousand  years  after 
Sinai,  the  Sabbath,  instead  of  being  disused  and  forgotten. 


SURVEY    OF   SABBATH    IN    HISTORY.  145 

like  so  many  other  obsolete  customs  and  rites,  or  instead 
of  being  limited  to  the  practice  of  the  people  of  Israel 
alone,  that  institution  has  become  a  universal  feature  of 
the  civilized  world.  Three  hundred  millions  of  Christians 
celebrate  that  day,  in  their  way,  and  in  connection  with 
their  creed.  Four  hundred  millions  of  Mohammedans  do 
the  same  in  connection  with  -theirs.  The  first  do  it,  indeed, 
on  Sunday ;  the  latter  on  Friday.  Yet  the  time  does  not 
change  the  intrinsic  nature  of  the  fact.  The  two  daughters 
of  Judaism  did  not  think  it  necessary  to  everywhere  bear 
the  features  of  their  mother.  As  everywhere  else,  so  here, 
things  went  on  by  compromise ;  the  Gentile  world  accepted 
the  kernel  and  changed  the  garb.  To  spare  old  time  preju- 
dices, forms  were  changed  to  disguise  features,  and  hide 
the  origin;  whilst  the  essence  of  tlie  Sabbatic  Institution 
was  retained.  Christianity  is  Biblical  spirit  in  a  Hindoo- 
Germanic  body  with  an  Egypto-Greek  drapery.  Mahomme- 
danism  is  biblical,  spirit  and  body,  shrouded  in  oriental 
colors  and  brandishing  an  Arabian  scimetar.  With  the 
spirit,  the  principal  institutions  of  our  Christian  brothers 
and  our  Mahommedan  cousins  are  of  biblical  origin.  And 
thus  the  Sunday  of  the  first  and  the  Friday  of  the  latter, 
each  is  simply  the  Mosaic  Sabbath.  Again,  when  the  French 
Revolution  of  1793,  in  its  paroxysm,  abolished  Catholicism 
and  Christianity,  with  all  positive  religion,  and  introduced 
that  of  ''Reason''  under  the  attractive  form  of  a  noted 
Parisian  beauty,  even  those  deicides  and  regicides  could  not 
kill  the  Sabbath;  they  kept  up  a  decadical  one,  as  the 
ancient  Egyptians,  each  tenth  day  was  devoted  to  rest. 
Even  the  Social  Democrats  in  1875,  at  Gotha,  declared  for 
the  Sabbath-rest,  though  they  are  religiously  indifferent. 
So,  too,  all  our  most  modern  iconoclasts,  thundering  against 
any  and  all  Sunday  restrictions,  are  but  aiming  at  the 
abolition  of  Clmrch  privileges  and  ecclesiastical  interference; 
but  they,  too,  acknowledge  the  absolute  necessity  of  a  spe- 

10 


146  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

cial  day  for  rest  and  culture ;  tlie  Mosaic  Sabbath  is  not  ques- 
tioned by  tliem,  since  it  is  a  human  need :  "  For  six  days 
shalt  tLou  labor  and  do  all  thy  work,  and  the  seventh  day 
consecrate  to  rest,  freedom,  thinking  and  moral  elevation," — 
religious,  scientific  and  humanitarian;  a  day  consecrated  to 
everything  divine  in  human  nature ;  until  slowly  man's 
entire  life  will  be  one  great  divine  service ;  until  duty, 
virtue  and  happiness  will  become  synonymous. 

Now  let  us  look  to  that  manna  passage  (Exod.  16,  26);  it 
is  fully  worth  our  while.  That  chapter  states  that  at  the 
Wilderness  of  Sin,  one  station  before  Mount  Sinai,  on  the 
fifteenth  day  of  the  second  month  after  the  Exodus,  the 
people  were  murmuring,  dissatisfied  with  their  food.  Then 
the  manna  was  given  them,  to  collect  daily,  fresh,  except 
on  the  seventh  day.  It  continues :  "  To-day  is  Sabbath  to 
Jahveh;  ye  shall  not  be  out;  six  days  shall  ye  collect  the 
manna  and  the  seventh  day  is  Sabbath.  Behold,  God  gave 
you  the  Sabbath ;  do  not  stir  from  your  places."  This  took 
place  before  the  Sinai  legislation.  The  logical  congrulty  is 
easy  to  guess.  The  Egyptian  Ebrews  did  know  the  Sabbath, 
but  did  not  much  observe  it.  Moses,  after  the  Exodus, 
and  especially  at  Sinai,  gave  it  aim  and  purpose  and  all  the 
solemnity  of  revelation,  raising  it  to  an  "0th  hrith"  a  sign 
of  the  covenant.  From  the  new  Assyrian  discoveries  we 
learn  that  the  moon's  monthly  four  phases  gave  rise  to  the 
four  monthly  weeks,  one  day  of  which  was  some  sort  of  a 
holiday,  known  to  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians;  not, 
indeed,  as  the  Mosaic  Sabbath,  an  epoch  of  rest  and  sancti- 
fication,  of  freedom  and  culture.  That  higher  evolution 
the  Bible,  later  civilization,  later  experiences  and  needs  gave 
it.  Originally  it  may  have  been  merely  a  day  of  pleasure,  a 
free,  popular,  weekly  festival,  consecrated  to  the  moon  or 
some  other  deity.  It  may  well  have  been  such  a  daj^  with 
some  or  with  all  the  Semitic  races  since  hoary  antiquity, 
connected  with  the  star  worship  of  ancient  Chaldea — older 


SABBATH,   THE    GRAND    SOCIAL   INSTITUTION.  147 

tlian  Abraham  and  Sinai.   Yet  special  and  particular  promi- 
nence it  received  in  history,  as  a  solemn  rest  consecrated  to 
God,  for  body  and  for  mind,  for  rich  and  poor,  freeman  and 
slave,  as  the  symbol  of  a  great  doctrine  and  people,  only 
and  singly  at  the  epoch  of  Sinai  and  the   advent  of   the 
Ebrew  liberator.     It  may  have  footprints  older  than  Semi- 
ramis   and   Nineveh,  but   history  only  dates   it   from  the 
Decalogue  and  the  Sinai  epoch.     I  am  strongly  inclined  to 
that  view,  not  only  by  the  simple  statement  of  Exodus  16, 
verse    26,   expressly  declaring  Sabbath   as   pre-Siiiaic,  but 
also  from  analogy.     From  comparative  religion  we  justly 
assume  that  festivals  do  not  suddenly  spring  up,  but  they 
slowly  develop  from  natural  data,  and  then  are   authori- 
tatively consecrated  as  men's  ethical   needs.     The   spring 
and  fair  seasons,  the  different  harvests,  life's  events,  etc., 
offer   opportunities   for   such   festive   days.     The  ''human 
heart  craves  to  connect  them  with  the  Deity;   men  ever 
yearning  for  God" — as  said  by  Homer  (^)  and  by  the  Psalm- 
ist.f )     Now,  when  after  long   centuries  of   experience,  we 
have  found  out  the  practicability  and  refining  influence  of 
such  days,  the  Deity  speaks  and  consecrates  them,  and  the 
truly  popular  and  sympathetic  lawgiver  embodies  them  in 
his  code  and  makes  them  the  pivot  for  new  combinations, 
the  vehicle  of  new  boons  for  his  fellow  men.     Thus  it  is 
with  all  festivals ;  thus  with  the  Sabbath,  too,  having  a  retro- 
spect even  anterior  to  Sinai  and  a  prospect  of  near  three 
thousand   five   hundred   years,  with  all   the   chances  of  a 
boundless  future,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  following  pages. 

Sabbath,  the  Grand  Social  Institution. 
In  fact,  we  may  say  that  now,  more  than  three  thousand 
years  after  it  had  been  confirmed  and  proclaimed  from  Mt. 
Horeb,  that  institution  has  become  universal;  it  is  to  be 

(1).   Havrsg  rJe  Qewv  jdreot'CT'  av&puTToi. — Odyssey,  III,  48. 

Ps.  118,  5— .H'  am»2  'jjy  ,n'  nxip  ivdh  p   (2) 


148  SPIRIT    OF  THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

found  wlierever  man  lias  emerged  from  his  native  savage- 
ness.  Wlierever  we  find  civilization,  there  we  also  meet 
with  a  Rest-day.  "Adam,  the  first  civilized  man  of  the 
Bible,  appeared  on  Friday,  and  at  once  the  Sabbath  became 
a  necessity."  Are  we  not  by  all  these  circumstances  and 
concurring  facts  logically  compelled  to  infer  that  our  Sab- 
bath is  not  simply  a  symbol,  a  sacrament,  a  sign,  for  some 
idea  or  commemoration,  but  itself  some  moral  or  social 
Institution  of  the  highest  moment?  That  it  carries  with 
itself  some  of  the  greatest  interests  of  the  State  or  of  entire 
mankind  at  large?  The  more  we  ponder,  the  more  we  are 
positively  compelled  to  come  to  the  conclusion  that  our 
weekly  institution  must  be  one  of  the  great  instruments  for 
bringing  about,  in  the  slow  process  of  time,  some  great 
moral  or  material  boon  of  human  happiness,  though  we  can 
not  as  yet  exactly  tell  the  nature  of  that  boon. 

After  having  recognized  the  great  part  of  the  Sabbath  in 
history,  let  us  now  try  to  find  out  the  nature  thereof,  the 
real,  though  secret  cause  of  its  importance,  that  we  may 
learn  why  it  has  become  a  universal  feature  of  civilized 
life.  In  order  to  be  enabled  to  do  that,  let  us  suppose  a 
people  perfectly  unacquainted  with  that  institution;  a 
people  without  any  official  rest-days,  commanded  by  divine 
authority  or  law  of  State.  In  the  present  times,  and  much 
more  so  in  antiquity,  the  great  majority  of  men,  called  the 
people,  are  and  were  hard-working,  bodily — laboring.  In 
antiquity  they  were  slaves;  later,  serfs.  They  were  not 
blacks,  nor  barbarians,  nor  vicious ;  no,  they  were  for  the  most 
part  prisoners  of  war.  The  conquered  lost  their  liberty. 
And  to  the  conquered  were  reckoned  all  who  were  bodily 
weaker  and  had  the  misfortune  to  displease  the  stronger. 
Plato,  the  famous  Athenian  philosopher,  a  descendant  from 
Theseus  and  Solon,  was  sold  into  slavery  by  Dionysius,  the 
tyrant  of  Syracuse,  for  a  few  free  words  uttered  in  the  hear- 
ing of  the  latter.    The  slave's  labor  was  hard  and  incessant, 


SABBATH,    THE    GRAND    SOCIAL    INSTITUTION.  149 

done  under  the  stern  eye  of  the  master.  And  there  is  no 
harder  master  now  than  want,  than  a  hungry  family,  for 
the  mass  of  the  present  people.  Now,  according  to  our 
supposition,  this  large  class  would  work  all  the  seven  week- 
days and  all  the  thirty  days  of  the  month  and  all  the  three 
hundred  and  sixty-five  days  of  the  year.  One  year  after 
another  will  pass  in  that  unceasing  toil  without  a  rest  or 
holiday. — How  long,  may  we  imagine,  could  such  a  hard- 
working man  or  class  of  men  bear  up  under  such  a  regime  f 
Ten  years  ?  Twenty  years  ?  Anyhow,  hardly  long  enough 
for  bringing  up  a  new  generation,  for  substituting  the 
unhappy  child  to  the  unhappy,  fainting  parent.  What 
signifies  that?  The  great  majority  of  the  people,  the  labor- 
ing class,  would  soon  die  out  and  become  extinct.  In  order, 
therefore,  to  insure  the  perpetuity,  the  material  life,  the 
propagation  of  the  race,  God  gave  to  man  the  boon  of  the 
Sabbath,  "that  he  may  (as  says  Maimonides)  pass  at  least 
the  seventh  part  of  his  life  in  peace."  On  that  day,  at 
least,  he  can  take  some  recreation,  restore  his  powers,  so  as 
to  be  enabled  to  repair  again  to  his  work  of  the  ensuing 
six  days. 

Thus,  we  find,  as  soon  as  men  begin  to  congregate  in 
larger  bodies,  in  gens  and  tribes  and  compound  societies, 
they  must  work;  spontaneous  nature  being  no  longer  suflS.- 
cient.  The  barbarian  has  few  needs  and  little  exertion,  but 
civilized  man  needs  more,  hence,  overwork ;  and  overwork 
will  soon  destroy  him.  Here  steps  in  the  law  and  regulates 
work :  "  six  days  shall  thou  labor  and  one  day  rest''  Our 
institution  begins  to  reveal  its  import.  It  is  the  great  reg- 
ulator of  work ;  just  as  our  generation  agitates  for  an  eight 
hours'  day  work.  We  likewise  begin  to  understand  the 
lofty  conception  thereof  as  contemporaneous  with  the  crea- 
tion of  Adam  (Genesis  II,  2).  Adam,  the  noblest,  the  highest 
development  of  creation,  the  dawn  of  civilized  human 
society, — Adam  needed  a  rest-day  after  the  weekly  toil,  and 


ISO  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  seventh  day  was  consecrated  to  that  purpose  for  his 
benefit.  Hence  the  quaint  Talmudical  saying  :  "  The  Sab- 
bath is  given  to  you,  not  you  to  the  Sabbath," 

The  Sabbath  is,  therefore,  as  says  its  etymology,  the 
grand  day  of  rest,  of  abstaining  from  all  menial  labor.  It 
is  the  recreation  day  for  the  masses,  the  hard-laboring 
human  strata. 

We  begin  now  to  grasp  the  meaning  of  our  other  texts : 
"  That  thy  male  and  female  servants  may  rest " — "  that  thy 
stranger  may  recuperate."  It  is  the  safeguard  of  the 
dependent  masses  of  old  and  of  modern  times.  It  regu- 
lates work;  it  hand-cuffs  the  hard  master  from  abusing  his 
power.  It  restrains  our  inner,  individual  masters,  greed 
and  gain.  As  the  parent  restrains  the  child  from  harming 
itself,  even  so  the  lawgiver  interferes  in  our  own  behalf, 
often  against  our  own  short-sighted  volition. 

The  Sabbath's  Manifold  Social  Bearings. 

Let  us  continue  our  hypothesis,  viz :  a  people  without 
public  Rest-days.  The  majority  of  that  people  is  contin- 
ually and  exclusively  occupied  with  material  labor.  The 
poor,  laboring  man  will  be  strictly  kept  under  the  yoke. 
Bodily  work,  and  nothing  but  bodily  work,  will  be  his  lot. 
The  poor,  the  dependent,  has  no  time  for  the  mind.  All 
spiritual  occupation,  all  culture  of  the  mental  faculties,  will 
be  jealously  withheld  from  him.  For  when  educated,  he 
may  aspire  to  liberty!  You  remember  the  aristocracies, 
old  or  modern,  were  and  are  declaring  that  the  poor  shall 
have  no  education ;  it  hurts  them  !  Bismarck  complained 
that  it  is  the  poor  man's  over-education  that  makes  him  a 
socialist.  Now  let  us  remember  that  the  real  distinction 
between  man  and  brute  is  surely  not  in  his  food  or  clothing 
nor  in  generation  or  extinction.  Our  food  is  often  less 
rational  in  its  artificiality  and  complications  than  that  of 
the  common  animal.     Our  clothing  belongs  to  the  Spanish 


THE   sabbath's    MANIFOLD   SOCIAL   BEARINGS.  151 

sheep,  the  Chinese  silJc  worm,  the  Indian  cotton  tree.    We 
are  "parading  with  other  people's  feathers." 

We  respire  and  sleep,  digest,  generate  and  die,  just  like 
the  vulgarest  of  animals.  Our  true  and  real  superiority- 
over  the  brute  consists,  principally,  in  our  spiritual  facul- 
ties, greater  brain  and  nerve  power,  greater  intelligence; 
we  are  moral  and  conscientious  beings;  we  try, at  least,  to 
practice  right  and  justice  whenever  we  can.  We  are  rational 
beings ;  we  aspire  to  truth,  knowledge  and  reason ;  we 
investigate  the  laws  of  nature ;  we  measure  the  heavenly 
orbits  in  their  eternal  march  through  unbounded  space.  We 
weigh  the  earth,  search  the  ocean's  abyss ;  chain  the  light- 
ning and  bid  the  elements :  "  Thus  far  and  no  further." 
We  are  affectionate  beings,  we  love  our  families,  our  friends, 
our  fellow-men,  as  far  as  it  goes.  Finally,  we  are  religious 
beings.  In  the  depth  of  feeling,  in  the  height  of  thought, 
dawn  the  ideals  of  God,  Providence  and  universal  harmony, 
of  soul,  freedom,  virtue,  beauty,  harmony,  perfection,  holi- 
ness, self-sacrifice,  humanity,  duty,  immortality,  etc.  The 
domain  of  these  spiritual  faculties  makes  the  essence  of 
manhood  and  womanhood.  Now  suppose  a  people  without 
Sabbaths  and  holidays — when  will  the  great  majority  of 
that  people,  the  laboring  class,  the  ninty-nine  out  of  each 
one  hundred,  arrive  at  that  manhood?  When  will  they 
become  beings  endowed  with  mental  or  spiritual  culture  ? 
When  will  they  aspire  to  truth  and  science,  reflect  on  virtue 
and  vice,  right  and  wrong,  the  beautiful,  the  sublime  and 
the  mean?  When  sympathize  with  their  friends;  when 
give  themselves  up  to  the  endearments  of  a  child,  a  consort, 
a  parent,  a  friend,  a  fellow-citizen  ?  When  reflect  on  the 
awful  enigma  of  body  and  soul,  world  and  God  ?  Never  I 
Never  will  they!  Never  can  they  have  the  leisure  for  it! 
Imperious  wants  absorb  all  their  time  with  bodily  work* 
The  bread,  the  fuel,  the  house-rent,  absorb  all  reflections. 
St.  Juste  pointedly  said :    '*  the  people's  rights,  that   is — 


152  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

bread ! "  What,  then,  will  be  the  necessary  consequences  of 
such  a  state  of  things?  The  great  laboring  masses  will 
never  arrive  at  manhood,  at  full  maturity.  Being  used  and 
abused  as  cattle,  they  will  soon  descend  to  the  level  of 
cattle.  Providence,  all-wise  and  all-benign,  foreseeing  this 
greatest  of  possible  misfortunes,  gave  mankind  the  great 
remedy  :  On  "  the  sixth  day,  evening,  he  created  Adam  and 
Eve/'  (^)  and  gave  them  the  seventh  day  as  the  noblest  of 
presents.  There  shall  be  no  labor  on  the  Sabbath.  The 
workingman  shall  rest  bodily,  and  spontaneously  he  will 
cultivate  his  mind.  On  the  Sabbath  at  least  the  laborer 
shall  be  a  man,  intellectually,  morally,  aifectionately  and 
religiously. 

And  thus  we  perfectly  understand  the  verses  in  Genesis 
II,  1.  When  heaven  and  earth  and  all  their  hosts  of  crea- 
tures were  in  their  final  developments  and  so  far  advanced 
as  to  bring  forth  Adam,  viz  :  civilized  man ;  when  the  cosmic 
conditions  were  so  far  matured  as  to  admit  of  moral  and 
rational  beings,  then  God  sanctified  one  day  out  of  seven 
for  the  benefit  of  man,  that  man  should  rest  from  his  toils, 
refresh  his  body  and  cultivate  his  mind,  civilize  and 
sanctify  himself.  Thus,  the  first  Decalogue  bases  the  Sab- 
batli  on  that  noble  metaphor — that  the  seventh  day  rest  is 
contemporaneous  with  creation,  viz :  with  the  advent,  the 
creation  of  civilized  man.  Immediately  man  began  to  be 
rational,  not  a  mere  instinctive  brute,  the  rest-day  was 
instituted  in  his  behalf. 

Democracy  and  Aristocracy. 

Thus,  our  institution  is  of  the  highest  importance  for  the 
material  and  for  the  mental  welfare  of  man  and  woman. 
But  it  is  much  more  than  that.  Let  us  continue  our 
hypothesis.  In  the  beginning  of  the  formation  of 
societies   and   states,  it   is  a  necessary   evil   that   citizens 

(1)  Medrashic. 


DEMOCRACY    AND    ARISTOCRACY.  153 

should  divide  into  an  aristocratic  minority  and  a  plebeian 
majority.  Tlie  few,  the  naturally  stronger,  wiser,  better 
gifted  or  situated,  think,  govern  and  enjoy.  The  many,  the 
less  favored,  obey,  learn  and  labor.  Now,  by  sheer  perverse- 
ness,  or  rather,  shortsightedness,  the  governing  minorities 
have  often  taken  a  narrow  egoism  for  their  rule  of  conduct 
or  policy.  They  try  to  govern  and  educate  the  masses  in 
such  a  way  as  to  keep  them  the  longest  in  a  state  of  subjec- 
tion ;  inventing  some  foolish  theory  of  assumed  superiority 
for  their  downright  usurpation.  You  remember  the  divine 
claims  of  the  Chinese  and  Japanese  emperors.  Alexander 
was  the  son  of  Jupiter  Amon;  Caesar  the  descendant  of 
^neas,  grandson  of  Zeus. — Vespasian,  dying,  said  satiri- 
cally, "  I  feel  I  am  becoming  a  god." — The  Incas  of  Peru 
claimed  to  be  descendant  from  the  sun. — It  is  the  story  of 
the  "  children  of  the  gods  marrying  the  daughters  of  men," 
ironically  mentioned  by  the  biblical  narrator  (Genesis  VI,  4.) 
These  usurpers  tell  us  that  God  is  the  father  of  the 
strong,  the  rich,  the  crafty,  and  that  the  poor  and  unedu- 
cated are  just  made  for  the  yoke.  You  know  the  vain 
arguments  of  political  and  social  oppressors,  the  Nimrods 
of  old  and  of  present  times;  banditti,  in  reality,  claimed  as 
demi-gods.  To  counterbalance  and  neutralize  these  danger- 
ous tendencies,  the  legislator,  the  friend  of  the  poor,  the 
stranger,  the  widow  and  orphan,  gave  to  mankind  the  Sab- 
bath. It  is  a  divine  veto  against  the  aristocratic  usurpa- 
tions of  all  ages.  The  almighty  law  declared :  On  this 
day  I  recognize  neither  master  nor  slave,  neither  rich  nor 
poor.  All  of  mortal  Adam's  children  shall  be  equal  before 
mine  eyes.  The  body  shall  rest ;  the  spirit  shall  cultivate 
and  develop  itself.  And  when  the  plebeian,  the  pariah,  has 
but  one  day  in  seven  for  recruiting  his  strength  and  culti- 
vating his  mind,  he  will  slowly  acquire  his  entire  liberty 
and  rise  in  the  social  scale,  rise  to  full  equality.  The 
aristocratic  minority  will  give  way,  and  slowly  there  will 


154  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

be  developed  a  great  democracy  of  free,  equal,  tliinking  and 
enjoying  citizens.  Thus,  Sabbath  is  of  paramount  import- 
ance in  a  physiological,  a  psychological  and  a  politico-social 
point  of  view.     Let  us  continue.     It  is  yet  more. 

Asa  stone,  dropping  into  water,  forms  a  circle,  this  forms 
another,  and  this  agaiu  another  one,  until  the  entire  surface 
is  covered  with  such  rings,  even  so  are  in  history  the  effects 
of  the  Sabbath  institution.  As  the  rising  sun  is  first  visible 
only  on  the  mountain  tops,  slowly  descending  upon  the 
plateaus,  and  finally  shedding  his  light  upon  high  and  low 
places,  upon  mount  and  dale,  even  so  the  Sabbath. — We 
have  seen  its  first  three  rings.  Let  us  observe  its 
unfoldings. 

As  in  every  nation  of  antiquity  we  find  a  small  reigning 
minority  and  a  large,  laboring,  plebeian  majority,  even  so 
were  all  the  different  branches  of  the  human  family 
divided  up  into  reigning  and  serving  races  or  tribes.  Scat- 
tered over  the  entire  globe,  so  manifold  in  soil,  configuration 
and  clime,  which  so  differently  influence  the  development 
of  beings,  the  different  races  and  aptitudes  of  mankind  were 
the  necessary  outcome,  dividing  them  up  into  superior  and 
inferior  ones,  stronger  and  weaker,  more  and  less  gifted 
ones.  Thus,  the  Gibeonites  were  subject  to  the  Ebrews; 
the  Helots  to  the  Spartans ;  the  Pariahs  to  the  Hindoos ; 
the  Provincials  to  the  Romans.  Nearly  the  same  in  modern 
times  in  Europe,  Asia  and  Africa.  A  few  races  born  and 
educated  under  more  happy  circumstances,  favored  by 
climate,  food,  natural  strongholds,  great  men,  etc.,  took  the 
lead  of  our  species,  representing  the  progressive,  the  civil- 
izing element  thereof,  and  soon  became  dominant  races ; 
whilst  the  younger  tribes  took  their  stand  around  the 
former,  serving  and  obeying  and  looking  up  to  them  as  to 
their  superiors  and  teachers.  And  that  was  quite  natural. 
The  aristocracy  of  the  mind  will  never  be  abolished. 
The   intelligent,   the   moral,   the   industrious  will   always 


DEMOCRACY  AND  OCHLOCRACY.  155 

rule  the  stupid,  the  vicious  and  the  lazy  ones.  So  with 
individuals  and  so  with  races  and  peoples.  This  was  not 
only  rational  and  just,  but  even  advantageous,  even  to  the 
serving  party  itself.  In  order  to  rule,  we  must  begin 
to  serve  an  apprenticeship. 

Democracy  and  Ochlocracy. 

All  wars  and  revolutions  and  conventions  and  new  con- 
stitutions are  of  no  avail  as  long  as  there  is  no  premium  for 
being  educated,  honest  and  thrifty.  The  rulers  must  he 
the  natural  aristocrats,  the  wiser  and  the  more  moral  ones. 
Full  and  unmitigated  democracy  is  ochlocracy.  As  long  as 
the  ignorant  and  the  vicious  rule,  as  long  as  such  vote,  elect 
and  are  elected  to  office,  as  long  as  we  have  no  just  criterion 
at  the  ballot-box,  the  source  of  modern  government,  so 
long  our  fate  will  not  be  bettered  one  whit. 

We  can  change  persons  and  parties,  but  we  may  always 
have  a  mob  at  the  helm  of  government.  Our  rulers, 
appointed  by  the  majority,  will  be  no  more  intellectual  or 
just  than  the  majority.  Wise  and  good  are  the  minorities. 
Our  rulers  will  always  lack  in  honesty  and  capacity.  The 
majorities,  with  the  best  will,  will  be  blindfolded  by  the 
gift  of  the  gab  and  flattery.  They  can  not  find  out  the 
worthy  candidates,  and  will  appoint — duped  by  vulgar 
time-servers  and  sophists — no  superior  legislators.  Remem- 
ber our  "  fiat  money  "  and  "  free  silverists."  There  is  but 
one  salvation  for  real  political  improvement,  viz  :  a  fusion  of 
Democracy  and  aristocracy,  each  to  be  modified  by  the 
other — government  must  be  for  the  people,  but  by  the  best 
and  noblest  of  the  people.  Only  the  wise  shall  rule,  the 
wise,  not  the  stump-speakers.  Our  modern  democracies 
are  somewhat  averse  to  that  wholesome  truth,  but  they 
will  slowly  learn  that  lesson.  Athens  and  Sparta,  Holland 
and  Switzerland  did,  and  so  will  America,  too.  The  mode 
of  our  elections,  the  criteria  of  electors  and  elected  must 


156  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

be  modified  in  such  a  manner,  that  only  the  educated,  the 
enlightened,  the  honest,  the  experienced,  if  possible  men 
of  genius,  not  the  artificial  arisrocrats,  but  nature's  true 
noblemen,  those  really  more  wise  and  virtuous,  should  be 
appointed  by  the  people  to  the  helm  of  government ; 
appointed  by  the  people  to  govern  for  the  people,  through 
the  best  of  the  people;  not  the  stump-speakers. — Hence,  a 
blending  of  democracy  and  aristocracy  in  the  interest  of 
all  parties  concerned.  Remember,  it  is  a  fiction  to  say  that 
men  are  born  with  equal  endowments.  Every  pedagogue 
will  tell  us  that  one  child  is  strong,  intelligent  and  mode- 
rate ;  the  other  weak,  stupid  and  ungovernable.  Through 
education  we  should  try  to  remedy  natural  defects  and 
discrepancies.  Nature  begins  with  inequality ;  circum- 
stances continue  that.  Education  ought  to  try  to  reach 
equality.  All  that  enlightened  democracy  can  do  is  through 
education  and  equal  chances  to  remedy  the  inequalities 
of  nature. — Here  it  is  where  historical,  artificial  aris- 
tocracy is  wrong.  It  denies  education,  and  inequality 
remains.  Democracy  justly  offers  the  same  chances  to 
every  citizen  to  become  all  that  nature  and  education  can 
make  of  him,  by  removing  all  contrived  notions  of  heredi- 
tary inferiority  and  all  artificial  barriers,  allowing  him  to 
develop  himself  to  his  utmost  capacity  and  will-power, 
and  as  much  as  possible  to  remedy  natural  defects.  This 
is  the  good  part  in  democracy  and  in  aristocracy,  viz :  To 
let  every  one  have  his  chances. — Artificial  aristocracy  is  a 
lie ;  the  natural  one  is  true.  Equality  taken  literally,  posi- 
tively, viz:  to  give  no  premium  to  honesty  and  capacity, 
what  they  call  '■'■rotation  in  ojffice^^  is  a  fallacy,  a  stupidity 
and  a  misfortune. — It  is  not  true  in  nature  nor  in  right. — 
The  gifted  lose  by  it,  and  the  incapable  lose  even  more, 
viz:  ''the  necessary  stimulus  to  vanquish  their  laziness  and 
improve."  Capable,  incapable,  all  society  slowly  Inpses  by 
that  into  barbarism.     As  long  as  this  pseudo  equality  is 


NATUKAL    AND    ARTIFICIAL    AEISTOCBATS.  157 

acted  upon,  so  long  is  democracy  a  failure,  and  European 
artificial  aristocracies  and  dynasties  have  yet  a  chance  to 
supplant  it.  Let  us  hope  the  American  democracy,  by  fully 
recognizing  the  true  nobility  of  mind, — not  of  race,  and  not 
of  birth, — will  not  give  them  that  chance. 

Natural  and  Artificial  Aristocrats. 

Now  the  natural  aristocracy,  however  legitimate  and 
advantageous,  when  well  understood,  ought  never  to  become 
a  caste ;  genius  not  being  hereditary.  The  natural  aristo- 
cracy should  never  become  a  historical  one,  but  ought  to 
aspire  towards  democracy;  the  elevation  of  all  should  be 
the  highest  aspiration  of  the  true  nobleman  of  nature. — 
Nature's  nobleman  is  not  jealous. — "Would  all  the  people 
were  prophets,"  prays  Moses,  whilst  his  servant  is  envious 
of  some  claimants  to  prophecy.(^) — ^The  older  superior  races 
ought  to  educate  the  younger  ones  in  such  a  way  as  to  bring 
them  up  to  full  manhood.  The  superiority  of  the  wiser 
and  better  developed  classes  ought  to  be  used  to  the  advan- 
tage of  the  less  favored  ones,  and  not  for  selfish  purposes. 
The  wise  men  rule  only  then  legitimately,  when  they  render 
the  foolish  wiser.  Unfortunately,  the  natural,  legitimate 
aristocracies  tend  to  change  into  historical,  artificial  ones, 
and  hence  the  antipathetic  significance  of  the  word  aristo- 
crat, no  longer  meaning  the  best,  but  the  privileged  one. 
They  try  to  perpetuate  their  dominion  by  privilege.  They 
continue  to  rule,  not  by  being  themselves  superior,  but  by 
making  others  inferior,  by  retarding  the  education  of  the 
less  favored  races,  by  keeping  back  human  progress  in 
general,  by  retaining  the  Helot  and  the  Pariah  in  perpetual 
childhood;  they  willfully  impede  and  retard  all  progress, 
that  of  their  own  race  inclusive,  and  thus  harm  their  own 
race  in  harming  others.  This  is  the  history  of  castes  in 
India,  China,  Egypt,  etc.,  and  of  classes  in  Europe.     Now 

(1)     IV.  M.,  11,39. 


158  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

if  matters  had  gone  on  that  way,  without  any  check,  the 
old.  state  of  things,  the  original  inequality,  would  have 
continued,  yea,  increased,  in  all  eternity.  A  few  classes  and 
tribes  only  would  have  acquired  some  civilization,  freedom 
and  happiness,  while  the  great  majority  of  the  different 
races  would  continue  unto  this  day  in  dependence  and  bar- 
barism as  Pariahs,  Helots  and  Gibeonites. 

Would,  then,  the  object  of  humanity  be  attained?  Would 
it  not  be  rather  frustrated  ?  Is  the  Almighty  the  father 
only  of  the  aristocrat,  of  the  Brahmin?  Is  he  not  the 
author  of  all  mankind,  of  all  creatures,  of  all  existence  ? 
Shall  the  State  prefer  one  child  to  another?  be  the  parent 
of  one  and  the  tyrant  of  the  other  ?  Society  may  give  to 
the  wise  authority  over  the  simple,  in  order  to  make  the 
simple  wiser,  but  not  for  nurturing  the  evil  spirit  of  arro- 
gance and  dominion,  of  race  and  caste. 

Sabbath's  Vast  Political  Influence. 

The  biblical  legislator,  therefore,  in  his  love  and  impar- 
tiality for  all  the  community,  put  in  his  veto  against  the 
oppression  of  all  times  and  of  all  forms.  Full  of  the  divine 
spirit,  he  bestowed  upon  mankind  the  gift  of  the  Sabhath. 
"Observe  the  Rest-day T  On  that  day  there  shall  be  no 
distinction  between  races,  origins  and  castes;  on  that  day 
the  slave  races  shall  be  free;  they  shall  rest  bodily  and 
recuperate ;  they  shall  cultivate  themselves  mentally, 
spiritually  and  develop  their  moral  instincts;  they  shall 
acquire  the  notions  of  the  noble  and  the  good ;  of  truth,  jus- 
tice and  liberty.  Thus  acquiring  through  education  power 
and  volition,  virtue  and  wisdom,  they  will  soon  find  the 
means  for  their  entire  liberation. 

The  dominant  races  will  gradually  reconcile  themselves 
to  the  idea  of  equality.  They  will  slowly  submit  to  a  new 
order  of  things :  the  abolition  of  privilege,  and  there  will 
gradually   be   established   a  universal   republic   of    equal, 


sabbath's  vast  political  influence.  159 

civilized,  happy,  brother-peoples  and  sister-countries.  Man- 
kind will  again  be  one  family  of  brothers,  with  one  father 
above,  sprung  from  one  parent-couple  on  earth.  Education 
will  make  that  Shem,  Ham  and  Japheth  will  be  again  the 
equal  and  blessed  children  of  the  one  patriarch,  Noah, 
before  the  Babel's  Tower  of  Egoism  had  divided  them  into 
different  castes,  races  and  classes. 

Thus  our  Sabbath  is  powerfully  promoting  the  great 
interests  of  our  species  in  d.todily,  intellectual,  social  and 
hvmanitarian  point  of  view.  Nay !  Our  institution  extends 
its  great  boons  even  to  the  animal  kingdom.  For  the  brute, 
though  not  endowed  with  reason,  is  not  without  feeling; 
it  is  therefore  entitled  to  its  comforts.  Its  existence  and 
well-being  are  necessary  for  the  civilization  of  man.  Hence 
the  law  must  protect  it.  Even  in  order  to  insure  its  propa- 
gation the  law  must  give  it  some  rest.  And  this  rest  is 
extended  to  it,  too,  by  the  great  Lawgiver  through  the  same 
day. 

Thus  our  institution  is  the  noble  benefactor  of  the  depend- 
ent, the  uneducated,  the  socially  unfree,  the  conquered 
.  races  and  the  brute.  It  extends  its  benign  influence  to  the 
utmost  boundaries  of  living  creation,  in  a  physical,  educa- 
tional, spiritual,  social,  humanitarian  and  universal  sense. 
Now  all  these  ideas  are  implied  in  the  above-quoted 
texts.  But  they  are  explicitly  set  forth  in  the  II  Decalogue, 
in  Deuter.  5, 14.  "  Observe  the  Sabbath  day  to  keep  it  holy, 
as  God  has  commanded  thee.  Six  days  shalt  thou  labor 
and  do  all  thy  work.  But  the  seventh  is  a  rest  to  the 
Eternal,  thy  God.  On  it  thou  shalt  do  no  manner  of  work ; 
thou,  nor  thy  son  and  thy  daughter,  nor  thy  male  servant 
and  female  servant,  nor  thy  ox  or  ass,  nor  any  of  thy  cattle, 
nor  the  stranger  in  thy  g^ie^—that  thy  man-  and  maid- 
servants shoidd  rest  like  thyself.  For  remember  that  a  slave 
thou  hast  been  in  Egypt,  but  God  brought  thee  out  from 
there  with  a  mighty  arm,  therefore  He  commanded  thee  to 


160  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

keep  the  Sabbath  day." — Before  analyzing  these  verses,  let. 
us  glance  at  our  other  texts.  The  first  declares  (Genesis  II., 
1):  "  God  sanctified  the  seventh  day,  after  the  last  creation," 
viz:  Adam. — With  the  advent  of  civilized  man,  Adam,  the 
Sabbath  became  necessary.  The  first  Decalogue  conveys 
the  same  idea.  After  the  declaration  of  God's  existence 
and  spirituality  looms  up  the  Sabbath  institution  (II.  M.  20.) 
as  necessary  for  a  civilized  community,  as  the  means  of 
human  spiritualization.  The  fourth  text  (II.  M.  23,  12) 
corroborates  plainly  the  sense  of  the  aforegiven  second 
Decalogue.  It  reads:  "Six  days  shalt  thou  work,  but  the 
seventh  day  thou  shalt  rest,  in  order  that  thy  ox  and  thy 
ass  shall  rest,  and  that  there  shall  recreate  themselves 
thy  slave  and  thy  stranger."  Let  us  now  analyze  Deut.  5, 12 : 
"Observe  the  Sabbath  day  to  sanctify  it." — That  means, 
that  day  is  set  apart  for  the  higher  purposes  of  human  life. 
He  continues:  "During  six  days  shalt  thou  work." — The 
different  needs  of  civilized  life  require  toil.  "But  the 
seventh  day  is  a  rest  to  God  " — hence  total  cessation  from 
menial  labor  and  the  day  to  be  consecrated  to  the  divine, 
i.  e.,  to  the  highest  objects  of  human  aspirations,  the  mental, 
moral  and  religious  in  our  nature. — "  Thou,  thy  son  and 
thy  daughter,"  ye  all  shall  rise  on  it  to  higher  planes  of 
intellectuality,  capacity  and  goodness.  "A?id  thy  male  and 
female  servants, ^^  for  their  bodily,  spiritual  and  social 
amelioration,  too,  for  their  gradual  emancipation. — "And 
thy  leasts  of  burden" — for  their  rest,  comfort  and 
preservation. — "And  the  stranger  within  thy  gates," — for 
the  subjected  races  and  pariahs  in  thy  reach. — "  That  thy 
servants  and  dependents  may  rest  and  recuperate  as  thy- 
self" — emphasizes  the  aim  of  the  day. 

Sabbath  the  Universal  Emancipation  Day. 

Observe  how  the  lawgiver  is  anxious  that  we  should  grasp 
the   import   of   the   Sabbath,   as   the   opportunity  for  the 


SABBATH    THE    POOR    MAN's    DAY.  161 

emancipation  of  the  toiling  masses.  He  knew  liuman 
nature !  Lest  tlie  upper  classes  might  cunningly  mistake ; 
lest  there  should  remain  some  doubt  concerning  the  great 
aim  of  our  weekly  institution;  lest  the  employer,  the 
plutocrat  and  the  historical  aristocrat,  should  claim  for 
themselves,  and  alone,  the  divine  privilege  of  that  day; 
lest  they  should  pretend  that  they  alone  are  the  "  cliildren 
of  the  gods,'^  that  they  and  their  race  sprang  from  the  head 
of  Brahma,  whilst  the  Pariah,  the  Helot,  the  peasant,  the 
wage-laborer  came  from  his  feet ;  lest  the  Baron  should 
exclude  the  poor  son  of  toil  even  from  the  protection  of 
this  grandest  institution  of  freedom,  the  Mosaic  lawgiver, 
as  a  true  son  of  toil  and  freedom  himself,  repeats  with  so 
much  emphasis,  and  lays  so  much  stress  on  the  subject  by 
summing  up:  ^'•Tliat  thy  man-servant  and  thy  maid-ser- 
vajit  may  rest  as  thyself."  This  is  his  principal  scope,  the 
chief  aim  of  the  Sabbath  day :  the  bodily  recreation,  the 
spiritual  culture,  the  gradual  emancipation  of  the  dependent 
masses.  The  powerful  ones,  the  free-born,  the  rich,  can 
have  a  nd  do  have  leisure,  ease  and  liberty  enough !  But 
the  great  laboring  class,  the  ninety-nine  out  of  every  one 
hundred,  they  need  all  the  solicitude,  all  the  tender  cares, 
all  the  warm  and  strong  protection  of  the  sympathetic  law- 
giver. After  God,  he  is  their  only  friend!  The  rich  can 
have  seven  free  days  in  the  week ;  the  poor  shall  have  one 
at  least !  Therefore,  for  them  especially,  is  intended  the 
Sabbatic  institution;  they  particularly  were  the  objects 
of  the  Biblical  Rest-day. 

Sabbath  the  Poor  Man's  Day. 

And  lest  the  haughty  nobleman,  the  employer,  in  his 
blind  pride  should  forget  the  divine  declaration  of  human 
equality,  of  men  being  all  "  shaped  in  heaven's  image," 
with  feeling  hearts,  consciences  and  noble  instincts,  the 
lawgiver  recalls  sternly  to  his  mind  (Deut.  5,  15) :  Well 
11 


162  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

mayst  tliou  remember  thy  original  slavery,  that  God 
brought  thee  out  from  Egypt  with  a  mighty  arm — therefore 
let  the  Sabbath  boon  be  the  boon  of  the  poor,  too.  There- 
fore be  not  selfish,  allow  him  his  chance  to  recuperate  and 
use  his  opportunity.  Kemember,  thou  art  not  born  a 
master,  not  born  in  the  purple,  not  born  in  a  gold  mine ; 
no,  a  "slave  wast  thou  in  Egypt,"  and  the  author  of  all 
freedom  and  justice  broke  thy  yoke  and  made  thee  free, — 
hale,  free  and  happy.  Remember,  therefore,  that  justice 
has  been  done  thee,  O  thou  proud  and  wealthy  one,  do  justice 
to  those  poor  and  humble  and  dependent  upon  thee !  For 
the  mighty  arm  of  supreme  justice  is  outstretched  over  him 
and  thee. 

You  remember,  American  reader,  your  ancestors'  or  your 
own  modern  Egypt  across  the  ocean.  You  are  mindful  of 
your  European  Egypt  of  yesterday,  or  a  century  ago,  of  the 
cruel  intolerance  and  ostracism,  the  many  great  and  small 
tyrannies,  the  poverty,  the  disabilities  yonder  in  Ireland, 
England,  Germany,  or  Russia,  at  the  hands  of  hierarchs 
or  patricians.  Here  on  the  holy  ground  of  Columbus's  fair 
land  we  all  are  celebrating  our  Sabbath,  political  and  social, 
under  the  segis  of  the  Constitution,  declaring  that  every 
human  being  is  entitled  to  aspire  to  life,  liberty  and  happi- 
ness. Here  let  us  be  mindful  of  the  redeeming  clause: 
"  Observe  the  Sabbath  day  that  thy  dependent  may  rest  as 
thyself."  Let  us  not  begrudge  the  poor  of  that  day.  Let 
the  clerk,  the  hand-laborer,  the  shopgirl,  the  apprentice,  the 
housemaid  not  be  robbed  of  it.  Let  us  remember  that  its 
special  and  express  object  is :  the  recreation  of  the  depend- 
ent, laboring  man  and  woman,  his  and  her  rest  and  spiritual 
culture,  his  and  her  social  elevation,  his  and  her  moral, 
mental  and  economic  redemption.  When  the  bright  sun  of 
the  glorious  Sabbath-day  dawns  upon  the  awakening  eyes 
of  him  and  her,  dependent  upon  you,  American  employers, 
the  fiLTst  thought  of  each  shall  be :     "  To-day  I  also  am  a 


SABBATH    FROM    THE    POLITICAL    STANDPfJlNT    SOLELY.       163 

free  being,  a  rational,  happy  being!  I  can  recreate  my 
body,  cultivate  my  mind,  rejoice  at  my  liome,  convene 
with  my  I'ellow-citizens,  commune  with  my  God !  I  feel  I 
am  worthy  of  freedom  and  happiness ! "  Such  let,  employers, 
your  dependents  feel  on  the  Sabbath. 

The  diverse,  far-reaching  objects  and  aims  of  that  day 
are  slowly  but  surely  being  attained.  The  goal  is  slowly 
approaching.  Observe  the  march  of  history  for  these  three 
thousand  years  from  Sinai  to  Washington,  from  Moses  to 
Cleveland.  Compare  the  gradual  development  of  society. 
Behold  chains  are  bursting  and  tyrannies  tumbling ;  slavery 
is  disappearing,  mounts  and  oceans  becoming  highways  of 
brother  peoples.  Do  you  hear  the  revolutionary  tocsin 
roaring  ?  These  are  the  workings  of  our  grand  institution. — 
They  are  announcing  the  emancipation-day  of  the  masses, 
the  great  Sabbath  of  mankind,  the  jubilee  of  right  and 
freedom,  education  and  happiness  for  all. 

Sabbath  from  the  Political  Standpoint  Solely. 

We  have  tried  to  unfold  the  meaning  of  that  institution, 
without  any  theological  postulate  or  any  supernatural 
assumption.  We  did  not  insist  upon  basing  it  on  the 
divine  rest  after  the  creation ;  nor  did  we  decide  whether 
the  creation  was  done  in  six  days  or  in  ceons  of  years,  or 
is  as  yet  going  on.  We  did  not  make  any  sectarian  assump- 
tions whatever ;  being  here  concerned  with  sociology  and 
States'  policy  solely;  with  law  and  matters  of  fact,  not 
with  theology  and  creed.  We  made  tabula  rasa  with 
all  educated  and  acquired  ideas  on  the  subject.  Thus 
untrammeled,  we  began  with  the  clear  ground  of  a  people 
having  no  ordained  official  rest-  and  holidays.  We  exam- 
ined how  that  would  work  upon  the  development  of  men, 
and  we  saw  that  there  would  be  no  development  whatever, 
that  mankind  would  dwarf  and  decay  and  slowly  disap- 
pear ;  that   the  first  condition  towards  a  gradual  healthy 


164  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

evolution  and  amelioration  is  just  such  a  public  rest-day 
for  all,  and  especially  for  the  mass  of  the  people ;  that  the 
physical  preservation  of  the  body  and  the  development  of 
mentality,  ethics,  freedom  and  equality  could  never  be 
brought  about,  except  with  such  a  periodical  rest-day  as 
the  primordial  condition. 

Sabbath,  Release  and  Jubilee. 

We  have  seen  that  the  Sabbath  is  not  simply  a  ceremony, 
a  sectarian  symbol  or  a  religious  sacrament.  No,  it  is  an 
institution  of  the  grandest  dimensions,  of  the  most  far- 
reaching  results,  the  condition  of  all  human  improvements- 
No  w  this  institution  has  slowly  developed  and  unfolded  and 
grew  into  the  mighty  tree:  the  Year  of  Release  and  the  Jubilee. 
Utilizing  some  good  material  of  older  religious  phases,  the 
legislator  declared  the  seventh  day  of  each  week  an  epoch 
for  the  higher  purposes  of  human  life,  vindicating  thus  for 
the  masses,  time  and  leisure  for  recreation  and  culture. 
Proceeding  by  that  sacred  number,  the  seventh  day  of  the 
week  became  the  Sabbath  rest.  Seven  festive  days  were 
consecrated  during  the  year  as  seasons  of  holy  memories 
and  rest.  The  seventh  week  after  Passover  closed  with  the 
Pentecost  and  the  commemoration  of  the  law  of  Sinai,  the 
charter  of  popular  rights  and  duties;  the  seventh  month, 
Tishre,  became  the  sacred  season  of  the  great  festivals,  viz  : 
the  day  of  Memorial,  or  of  counting  the  civil  year, — the 
sublime  day  of  Atonement,  and  the  feast  of  Tabernacles, — 
the  modern  Thanksgiving-day.  Again,  every  seventh  year 
became  the  Release-year,  for  liberating  every  Ebrew  slave 
and  remitting  all  indebtedness,  the  greatest  curse  in  antique 
times.  Finally,  the  seventh  Release-year  culminated  in  the 
Jubilee,  the  great  national  cycle,  restoring  persons,  soil  and 
houses  to  their  original  condition;  remedying  all  inequali- 
ties, all  wrongs  and  all  misfortunes;  radically  renovating 
the  entire  State  and  Society,  and  replacing  them  as  origi- 


SABBATH  AND  THE  SOCIAL  PROBLEM.  165 

nally  intended  by  the  lawgiver,  viz:  every  one  being  free, 
every  one  holding  his  family-lot,  his  house  and  his  acre, 
free  in  the  midst  of  his  family;  no  one  a  dependent  pauper; 
no  one  lording  over  his  equals;  a  competence  to  each, 
plutocracy  for  none.  Thus,  better  than  Lycurgus,  remedy- 
ing social  inequalities,  allowing  individualism,  family,  prop- 
erty and  accumulation,  yet  tempering  egoism  by  altruism, 
placing  insuperable  barriers  against  greed,  avarice  and  soul- 
less competition ;  compelling  the  cunning  and  the  monopo- 
list to  leave  some  room  for  the  less  favored  brother,  keeping 
up  a  certain  sameness  of  fortune  and  of  power  in  the  social 
ranks,  and,  by  that  means  substantiating  and  perpetuating 
the  original  equality  and  liberty  among  the  citizens. 

The  grandeur  of  that  scheme  explains  the  noble  biblical 
verse  (Genesis  II,  2) :  "  When  creation  had  been  accom- 
plished, then  God  blessed  the  seventh  day  and  sanctified 
it."  Indeed,  out  of  the  root  of  the  seventh  week-day,  con- 
secrated as  the  rest  and  recreation  for  the  laboring  masses, 
and  even  the  beast,  slowly  developed  the  festive  calendar, 
the  national  union  and  its  sacred  memories,  the  Septennate 
and  the  Jubilee.  Thus,  Sabbath,  Release  and  Jubilee  con- 
stitute the  three  Hercules  columns  of  the  Mosaic  State,  in 
an  economical,  social,  moral  and  political  sense.  The  law- 
giver built  up  the  freedom,  the  equality  and  the  economical 
happiness  of  his  people  upon  these  three  grand  pillars. 

The  Sabbath  has  since  been  adopted  by  the  entire  civil- 
ized world.  May  not  the  other  two  await  a  similar  acceptance 
by  advancing  mankind  ?  Would  not  an  inalienable  acre  for 
every  born  human  being  be  a  feasible  thing  ?  Would  not  a 
periodical  release  from  the  bondage  of  debt  be  possible? 
Could  not  mad  competition,  with  plutocracy  and  prole- 
tarianism,  be  put  to  the  chain?     Reader,  think! 

Sabbath  and  the  Social  Problem. 

In  that  manner  tries  the  Bible  to  remedy  the  social 
question.     This  question  is  old  as  mankind.     Formerly  it 


166  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

was  kept  down  by  slavery  and  serfdom.  The  masses,  now 
emancipated,  clamor  for  their  share,  and  hence  looms  up 
the  social  question.  It  is  in  the  front  rank  in  America, 
just  as  in  Europe ;  it  is  growing  more  menacing  day  by  day, — 
being  now  nearly  all-absorbing;  more  important  than  even 
peace  and  war,  freedom,  law  and  government;  the  formi- 
dable question  how  to  screen  the  weak  from  hunger  and 
cold ;  how  to  house  and  shelter  the  masses  from  the  heart- 
less competition  of  the  rich  and  the  strong;  how  to  incul- 
cate the  duty  of  "live  and  Jet  live."  It  threatens  existent 
nations  with  social  war  and  dynamite — war  bitterer  than 
ambition  or  fanaticism  ever  were.  "  The  right  of  the  people 
is  bread."  C) 

The  biblical  Sabbath-day  has  had  its  fair  trial,  and 
though  spoiled  in  many  ways  by  petty  meddling  in  old  and 
modern,  yea,  in  present  times,  by  Sabbath — and  Sunday — 
laws,  meddlings  showing  how  little  great  ideas  are  grasped 
by  the  average  expounders,  lay  and  clerical,  how  often  they 
are  exploited  by  petty,  cunning  officials  or  ecclesiastics — 
though  spoiled  by  abuse,  yet  the  Sabbath  could  not  be 
made  inoperative.  It  yet  succeeded,  and  did  wonderful 
services  in  the  development  of  mankind. 

The  seven  yearly  festive  days  have  been,  too,  accepted  by 
large  portions  thereof,  and  do  effectively  assist  in  bringing 
cheer,  joy  and  noble  reminiscences  to  human  hearts  and 
brains.  The  Atonement-day  has  not  been  yet  sufficiently 
appreciated.  The  idea  of  assembling  the  people  once  yearly 
for  reflection  and  improvement,  for  giving  and  for  receiving 
pardon,  is  a  grand  one,  as  a  simply  ethical  and  humani- 
tarian measure  of  advancement. 

The  church  and  the  mosque  have  some  sort  of  substitutes 
thereof,  but  rather  in  the  shape  of  sacraments  and  fasts,  not 
in  its  essence,  viz.,  meditation  and  self-confession,  improve- 
ment and  reconciliation,  with  conscience  and  with  fellow- 

(1)    St.  Juste. 


SABBATH    AND   THE   SOCIAL   PROBLEM.  167 

men.  The  racial  jealousy  is  here  the  chief  cause.  From 
mere  sectarian  pride  the  world  has  neglected  many  grand 
biblical  institutions;  or,  changing  their  robes,  they  altered 
their  essence.  The  Atonement-day  is  a  great  idea,  and 
lawgivers  ought  to  bestow  more  thought  upon  it  as  a  useful 
institution. 

But  above  all  have  the  last  rings  of  that  seven-fold  cycle 
been  neglected,  viz:  the  Year  of  Release  and  the  Jubilee? 
The  fact  is,  these  conceptions  have  never  yet  been  fairly 
tried.  They  were  ignored  during  the  first  period  of  Ebrew 
histo^J^  But  even  during  the  second  one,  only  the  letter 
of  the  institution  was  retained,  not  the  spirit.  The  people 
got  the  straw,  whilst  the  grain  had  been  thrashed  out,  by 
the  casuistry  of  the  expounders  or  the  despotism  of  the 
rulers.  Indeed,  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  and  Judas  Maccabeus 
had  heart  and  nerve  enough  for  such  a  trial.  But  the  later 
Hasmonean  princes,  and  especially  the  latest  Herodians,  were 
not  of  that  calibre.  They  had  not  the  heart  nor  the  head  even 
to  pay  any  attention  to  such  far-reaching  institutions ;  the 
less  to  realize  them.  Apparently  they  mistook  them  for 
usual  ceremonies  and  observances.  Later,  Rome  crushed 
out  every  attempt  at  individuality.  Tacitus  ridiculed  them 
as  a  piece  of  national  laziness  (History  V.,  4.)  For  centu- 
ries, Rome  herself  stood  upon  the  volcano  of  plutocracy  and 
pauperism,  and  many  a  time  she  was  shaken  to  her  pro- 
foundest  base.  Mad  ambition  for  the  patricians:  "Bread 
and  play  "  for  the  proletarians — that  was  her  State  policy. 
To  remedy  the  evil,  herself,  or  to  allow  others  to  remedy 
theirs,  that  was  out  of  the  question.  When  the  Roman 
world  broke  down,  came  the  great  invasions  with  the  new 
political  and  social  order,  the  Germanic  peoples  and  feudal- 
ism, or  landlordism,  with  vassalage,  in  place  of  former 
slavery, — a  mitigation  in  degree,  not  in  kind.  Entire  Society 
was  enchained  with  one  huge  hierarchical  bond ;  the  very 
opposite  of  the  Mosaic  ideal.     The  Bible  wants  a  State  with 


168  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

equal  and  free  citizens,  with  equal  means  and  with  solidarity. 
Feudalism  developed  a  Society  personified  in  and  absorbed 
by  the  king  and  the  baron,  who  absorbed  all ;  the  people  thus 
becoming  their  tools  and  instruments  for  personal  ambition 
and  perpetual  wars.  In  Switzerland,  and  later  in  Holland, 
the  biblical  idea  gained  some  hold  upon  the  State.  But  it 
was  the  American  and  French  revolutions  that  made  the  world 
turn  its  eyes  again  towards  the  Mosaic  society.  Modern^ 
American  Democracy  stands  on  Sinaic  grounds.  May  be, 
philanthropists,  economists  and  philosophers  will  yet  find 
out  that  the  biblical  legislation  contains  some  remedy  for 
our  all-absorbing  social  question.  May  be  that  the  teachers 
of  Social  Democracy  may  yet  willingly  sit  down  at  the  feet 
of  the  Legislator  from  Sinai  and  his  successors. 

It  would  be  worth  while  to  closely  examine  that  grand. 
Mosaic  trial  at  compromising  between  property  and  com- 
munism, between  egoism  and  altruism  :  by  the  above-men- 
tioned, vast,  moral  and  economic  enactments;  the  full  and 
entire  Septennate  system,  the  Sabbath-day,  Sabbath-year  and 
Sabbath-cycle  of  fifty  years  in  their  grand  ensemble.  But 
let  it  be  done  without  prejudice.  Formerly  the  Sinai 
laws  were  accepted  as  binding,  upon  all  times  and  all  cir- 
cumstances, in  all  its  details.  Now  the  opposite  direction 
prevails.  Let  all  prejudice  be  dropped  and  an  impartial 
examination  be  held :  what  elements  thereof  are  available 
for  our  times;  and  I  think,  the  present  State,  with  its 
all-absorbing  social  question,  would  profit  by  such  an 
unbiased  investigation. 


PART   IV. 

THE  BIBLICAL  STATE  AND  SOLIDARITY. 

Having  spoken  of  tlie  individual  liberty,  the  personal 
equality  and  the  equal  distribution  of  wealth  in  the  biblical 
State,  we  now  arrive  at  the  fourth  cardinal  principle  of 
that  legislation, — the  solidarity  of  the  members  of  the 
commonwealth.  The  rock  underlying  the  entire  social 
structure  is  mutual  sympathy,  the  solid  feeling  of  the 
community  of  interests  among  its  social  units.  This  feel- 
ing, natural  between  the  rational  parts  of  any  composite 
body,  as  between  husband  and  wife,  between  members  of 
a  family,  slowly  extending  to  the  gens,  the  patriarchal  group, 
the  tribe  and  the  people,  the  legislator  strove  to  fan  and 
kindle  into  full  consciousness  among  the  horde  brought 
out  from  Egypt  and  established  in  Canaan.  This  is  the 
feeling  of  solidarity ,  the  conviction  that  the  welfare  of 
each  is  bound  up  with  that  of  his  fellow-citizens.  Egoism 
is  whispering  that  our  interest  is  contrary  to  that  of  our 
neighbor's,  that  our  advantage  and  his  advantage  are  like 
the  two  buckets  at  the  well :  whenever  the  one  is  up  the 
other  is  down.  But  altruism  is  the  other  instinct  lying 
deeper  even  in  our  soul,  with  a  "  still,  thin,  yet  divine 
voice,"  whispering:  "  No,  mine  and  the  neighbor's  interests 
really  and  truly  go  together.  I  can  not  be  happy  without 
his  being  so  too."  Remark  :  Mosaism  has  here  another 
tendency  than  the  New  Testament  has.  Mosaism  endeavors 
to  mitigate,  curb  and  moderate  selfishness  by  love  to  fellow- 
ship. But  it  makes  no  attempt  at  eliminating  selfishness. 
For,  indeed,  human  society  could  not  subsist  without  love 
of  self,  either.    Without  the  powerful  stimulus  of  self,  wife 


170  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

and  child,  late  offspring,  future  name,  reward,  glory,  etc.,  etc. 
we  could  never  overcome  tlie  formidable  obstacles  in  the 
way  of  human  advance,  of  work,  toil,  discovery  and  inven- 
tion. That  prodigious  amount  of  self-sacrifice  and  abnega- 
tion required  by  an  Aristides,  an  Elijah,  a  Paul,  a 
Mendelssohn,  to  fulfill  what  they  did,  and  under  their 
circumstances,  must  have  had  some  backbone  of  self -grati- 
fication too,  besides  ideality  and  self-sacrifice.  Moses, 
therefore,  endeavored  to  temper  and  fuse  both  self  and 
others,  egoism  and  altruism,  into  one  harmonious  whole. 
Upon  both  he  created  his  social  fabric.  Hence  he  said : 
"Love  thy  neighbor  and  love  the  stranger  as  thyself." 
"  Tolerate  thy  enemy." — "  Expostulate  with  him,  but  bear 
him  no  grudge."  Never  did  he  ask  for :  "  Love  thy 
enemy,"  because  a  human  State  could  not  subsist  wholly 
upon  self  sacrifice,  could  not  stand  without  a  strong  alloy 
of  selfishness. 

The  New  Testament  starting  from  a  monastic  society,  with 
common  property,  a  mystic  "pMlanstere'''  of  saints  and 
saintesses,  all  striving  to  realize  the  "kingdom  of  heaven 
upon  earth," — such  a  community  with  such  ideal  aspirations 
could  make  the  trial  at  eliminating  self  and  found  its 
system  upon  pure  altruism.  Mosaism,  less  ideal,  aiming  at 
establishing  a  human  State  with  average  human  beings  as 
its  units,  with  work  and  family  as  its  corner-stone,  had, 
therefore,  to  keep  alive  the  feeling  of  solidarity  in  order  to 
counterbalance  egoism,  by  teaching  not  simply  rigid  justice 
and  equality,  "eye  for  eye,^'  but  another  deeper  principle — 
that  of  benevolence  and  kindliness,  of  reciprocity  and  sym- 
pathy to  our  species.  That  remark  disposes  of  the  stale 
criticism  that  Mosaism  is  but  cold  justice,  the  scales  of 
mine  and  thine,  and  that  love  and  charity  were  waiting  for 
Voltaire  to  be  revealed.  On  examination  we  shall  find 
sympathy  at  the  very  bottom  of  the  Mosaic  system. 


legal  prejudice  or  solidarity.  171 

Legal  Prejudice  or  Solidarity. 

This  principle  of  benevolence  and  solidarity  to  our  species 
is  surely  one  of  the  most  prominent  and  most  deeply  rooted 
in  the  human  breast.  Let  us  hope  for  the  honor  of  our 
species  that  it  has  never  been  entirely  stifled.  But  how 
often  has  it  been  obscured,  falsified  or  silenced  by  the 
prejudices  of  the  blind  masses,  or  even  the  passions  of  the 
leaders!  The  history  of  legislation,  ancient  and  modern, 
sacred  and  profane,  tells  us  how  often  prejudice  of  nation- 
ality, of  tongue,  country,  caste,  sect  and  condition, — vulgar, 
foolish  and  cruel  prejudices,  have  been  converted  into  laws 
and  sanctioned  by  the  authority  of  the  State,  nay,  of 
religion.  What  a  sacrilege!  What  a  blasphemy  against 
God,  reason  and  justice  to  embody  hatred  and  folly  into  a 
code  of  laws  destined  for  the  education  and  government  of 
mankind!  Mosaism  is  fairly  free  of  such  dark,  bloody 
stains.  Save  its  severities  against  the  Canaanites  and  the 
Amalekites,  severities,  no  doubt,  urgently  dictated  by  the 
given  circumstances  and  conditions,  except  that  Mosaism 
is  free  of  those  bigoted,  narrow-minded,  Draconic  laws 
which  fill  half  of  the  world's  codes.  Let  us  survey  the 
verses  of  our  section  in  question,  and  we  shall  soon  feel 
convinced  of  the  broad,  humanitarian  character  of  "  Mish- 
patim,^^  our  chapters  on  "  Laws  and  Ordinances  "  (II.  M.  22, 
20,  etc.)  There  we  read:  "An  immigrant  thou  shalt  not 
overreach  nor  oppress,  for  immigrants  ye  were  in  Egypt." — 
'•The  widow  and  the  orphan  ye  shall  not  wrong,  for  they 
will  but  cry  unto  Me,  and  I  will  listen  unto  them  and  shall 
retaliate  upon  you,"  etc. — "If  thou  lendest  money,  be  not 
hard  upon  the  debtor,  nor  take  any  interest  of  him." — "If 
thou  takest  as  a  pawn  the  dress  of  thy  fellow,  return  it  to 
him  at  sunset." — "  Do  not  carry  around  false  reports." — "  Do 
not  incline  to  the  majority  for  evil,  nor  shalt  thou  favor  the 
poor  one  in  his  contest." — "  When  thou  meetest  thy  enemy's 


172  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

OX  astray,  return  it  to  him." — "  When  thy  enemy's  beast 
succumbs  under  its  burden,  thou  shalt  relieve  it." — 
"  Nor  shalt  thou  bend  justice  against  the  poor." — ''Take  no 
bribe,  for  bribery  blinds  the  eyes  of  the* wise." — "The 
growth  of  the  seventh  year  leave  to  the  poor." — "The 
seventh  day  keep  as  a  rest  for  the  poor,  the  animal,"  etc., 
etc. — What  grand  traits  of  broad  sympathy,  of  fellow- 
feeling  with  fellow-creatures,  man  or  beast! 

The  Bible  Poor-Laws. 

Let  us  see  now  the  Mosaic  poor-laws,  arising  from  solidar- 
ity and  reciprocity  of  interests.  In  the  preceding  pages 
we  have  taken  England  as  an  example  for  illustrating  how 
little  theoretical  liberty  and  legal  equality  influence 
real,  social  equality.  Let  us  now  do  the  same  regarding 
her  pauper  laws,  for  these  are,  most  probably,  the  oldest 
extant,  as  is  English  liberty  and  equality.  Already  under 
the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  the  British  statutes  provided  in 
some  measure  for  the  destitute.  Besides  private,  corporate 
and  communal  charities,  the  poor-rates  of  England  in  1831 
amounted  to  forty  millions  of  dollars.  England  has, 
besides,  many  poor-establishments,  as:  work-houses  and 
poor  colonies,  soup  establishments,  endowments  of  fuel, 
clothing,  homes,  poor-hospitals,  etc.,  etc.  Yet  with  all 
this  fair  expense  of  treasure  and  sympathy,  Albion  has 
probably  the  largest  and  most  abject  pauper  class  in 
the  world;  a  million  of  English  subjects  are  belonging 
to  that  class!  There  the  indigent  very  rarely  succeed  in 
raising  themselves  from  that  abyss  of  economical  and 
moral  ruin.  The  English  pauper  has  but  one  means  of 
salvation,  that  is  emigration.  As  long  as  he  stays  at  home 
and  gets  his  poor-rates  and  his  poor-boons,  he  remains  an 
outcast,  a  social  leper ;  deprived  of  his  civic  rights,  almost 
of  his  human  rights.  Why?  Because  of  the  terrible 
social  inequality !     Whilst  society  keeps  him  from  starva- 


THE    BIBLE    POOR    LAWS.  173 

tion,  it  likewise  hinders  liim  in  Ms  efforts,  it  keeps  liim 
down  in  tlie  bonds  of  pauperism.  Sucli  is  England,  the 
most  enlightened  and  humane  country  of  Europe. 

Mosaism  starts  from  another  standpoint.  All  citizens  are 
free,  all  equally  noble  born.  "  Ye  shall  be  a  kingdom  of  priests 
and  a  holy  nation." — "  Mine  is  Israel."  "  Mine  is  the  land." 
All  obey  the  same  laws,  all  have  equal  rights  and  duties. 
Hence,  equal  interests  and  solidarity ;  no  proletarians,  no 
paupers !  But  shall  the  thrifty,  the  intelligent,  the  indus- 
trious, have  no  premium  ?  Yes,  he  shall  surely  have  one  ; 
the  fruits  of  his  virtues  are  his.  No  communism  !  Shall 
the  vicious,  the  lazy  and  stupid  one  not  feel  his  punish- 
ment ?  Undoubtedly !  All  the  pangs  of  poverty,  of 
dependence,  of  a  biting  conscience,  shall  stimulate  him 
to  improve.  Pauperism  is  no  privilege  and  no  virtue, 
as  in  Brahmanism.  The  law  declares :  "Jf^avor  not  the 
poor  in  his  contest.'^ — Shall  he  be  crushed  under  his 
poverty ;  he  and  his  innocent  family  ?  No  !  The  Release- 
year  rescues  his  personal  liberty;  it  cancels  his  debts. 
Jubilee  redeems  his  family-lot;  Sabbath  gives  him  a 
breathing  spell.  Shall  he,  in  the  meantime,  starve  or  live 
on  alms?  No!  There  steps  in  solidarity:  the  thrifty,  the 
intelligent,  etc.,  profiting  by  the  lazy  and  stupid,  must  leave 
them  at  least  a  pittance  to  keep  them  from  starvation. 

Thus  the  Bible  levies  upon  the  wealthy  contributions  for 
the  poor;  as  Mr.  Chamberlain  said:  "The  rich  must  pay  a 
ransom  to  the  poor ; "  not  because  it  is  a  sin  to  be  rich,  or  a 
virtue  to  be  poor.  No,  but  because  the  rich,  the  cunning,  the 
efficient,  the  thrifty  profit  by  the  ill  luck  of  the  poor  and 
lazy.  The  first  have  not  only  their  own,  legitimate  share ; 
they  have  also  the  share  of  the  luckless.  Hence  it  is  just, 
they  should  help  those  latter  ones  to  a  pittance ;  hence  the 
tithes  for  the  poor,  the  Levites,  the  unhappy,  the  impover- 
ished and  the  vicious.  This  is  a  duty,  not  a  charity.  The 
grand  principle  is  solidarity,  aiming  at  Q)  "  Let  there  be  no 

.p'3N  ^2  n^n"  N*^  ^3  DSN     (1) 


174  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

pauper  class  among  you."     Give  each  a  chance  to  rise  again 
and  become  independent. 

Poor  and  Pauper. 

We  have  seen  that  by  the  Sabbatic  Year  and  the  Jubilee 
Mosaism  tries  to  remedy  the  greatest  social  evils,  pauper- 
ism and  plutocracy. — The  English  social  conditions,  viz : 
Lords  of  one-half  million  pounds  yearly  income,  on  one 
hand,  and  one  hundred  thousand  paupers,  with  thirty 
thousand  lewd  women  in  London  alone,  on  the  other,  are 
obviated  in  the  biblical  State.  But  as  industry,  capacity, 
frugality  and  good  luck,  etc.,  will  always  be  great  factors 
in  the  economy  of  a  nation,  just  so  will  the  above  Sabbatic 
Institutions  alone  not  suISce  to  equalize  fortunes.  A  great 
discrepancy  will  always  remain.  At  the  utmost  may  we 
succeed  in  eradicating  an  hereditary  pauper  class,  not  in 
totally  discarding  proletarianism  and  poverty.  Hence  is  the 
Mosaic  double  axiom  perfectly  conceivable,  of  V.  M.  15,  4 : 
"  In  order  that  there  should  be  no  pauper  among  you; "  and 
further  again,  in  Y.  M.  15,  11,  affii'ming:  "There  will  never 
fail  some  poor  one  in  the  land ;  therefore  open  thy  hand  to 
him."  In  both  verses  the  original  has  the  word  ''Bhiyon.^' 
But  in  the  first  one  it  means  a  pauper,  in  the  last  a  poor 
one;  as  in  all  old  languages,  the  same  word  means  both. 
Indeed,  the  idea  and  the  word  pauper  are  of  modern  origin, 
our  own  social  circumstances  having  created  an  hereditary 
pauper  class ;  in  antiquity  it  was  unknown ;  rich  and  poor 
were  always  liable  to  change  rolls  and  hands.  But  the 
Pentateuch,  deprecating  chronic  pauperism,  admits  that  there 
will  ever  be  poor  ones.  Modern  communism  alone  is  claim- 
ing the  Utopia  of  an  absolute  equality  of  fortunes.  In 
reality,  luck,  capacity,  thrift,  prudence,  the  number  of  chil- 
dren in  the  family,  widows,  orphans,  exiles,  idealists,  weak- 
lings, invalids,  vicious,  etc.,  will  ever  influence  economic 
conditions.     The  Bible,  wishing  to  extend  the  principle  of 


USURY,    MONOPOLIES    AND    RINGS.  175 

solidarity  throughout  all  the  ranks  of  society,  and  endeavor- 
ing not  simply  to  eradicate  pauperism,  but  even  to  mitigate 
poverty  and  give  the  needy  all  possible  chances  of  recuper- 
ating, except  communism,  has  therefore  instituted  a  long 
string  of  laws,  to  give  the  poor  a  competency.  These  laws 
are  of  a  double  nature,  negative  and  positive.  One  set  of 
laws  forbids  putting  any  hindrance  in  the  way  of  the  poor. 
The  other  set  of  laws  commands  active  assistance  for  him. 
We  shall  begin  with  the  first  named,  the  negative  ones. 

Negative  Poor-Laws. 

"  An  Ebrew  servant  goes  out  free  in  the  seventh  year." 
(II.  M.  21,  2).  The  Roman  slave,  client,  conquered,  etc., 
never  had  any  such  boon.  The  Judsean's  alienated  family- 
lot  was  to  be  redeemed  by  his  near  kinsman.  Latest  the 
Jubilee  set  it  free  (III.  M.  25,  25-28.)  Thus  he  and  his 
posterity  always  had  something  to  fall  back  upon.  Never 
was  there  a  pauper  born  in  the  Biblical  Society.  The 
Judsean  could  never  be  crushed  and  buried  under  indebted- 
ness, as  in  all  ancient  States  it  was  the  case;  half  of 
enslavements  there  had  that  for  their  origin.  The  Ebrew 
laws  prescribed  the  cancellation  of  all  debts  in  the  seventh 
year— (Y.  M.  15,  2  and  9). 

Usury,  Monopolies  and  Rings. 

In  ancient  and  in  modern  times  the  poor  suffer  especially 
under  the  burden  of  usury  or  interest,  the  original  capital 
accumulating  by  it  a  hundredfold.  The  Ebrew  law  for- 
bade all  interest  on  money,  and  all  profit  on  goods  and 
eatables.  (III.  M.  25,  35.)  Again,  no  monopoly  was  allowed. — 
In  ancient  and  modern  times  the  poor  suffer  terribly  by  the 
pushing  up  of  prices  of  bread,  meat,  coal,  etc.,  by  the  rings 
cornering  the  market,  availing  themselves  of  "  unions  "  and 
combinations,  profiting  by  monopolies  and  huge  capitalism 
to  enhance  the  prices  of  victuals,  clothing  and  fuel,  with- 


176  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

out  any  reasonable  cause,  just  by  cornering  the  poor  buyer's 
market.  The  Bible  proscribes  not  only  money  interest, 
but  all  kinds  of  usury  or  increase  upon  eatables  and  making 
profit  on  any  kind  of  goods.  (III.  M.  25-36,  and  elsewhere.) 
Any  kind  of  buying  and  selling  with  a  view  to  profit  is 
prohibited.  All  trade  is  thus  forbidden,  not  only  pawn- 
broking,  as  usury.  Only  with  foreign  countries  such  was 
allowed.  The  Gentile  living  in  Judaea  participated  in  that 
privilege.  No  interest  or  profit,  on.  money  or  goods,  was 
allowed  to  be  taken  of  him.  ''  Be  he  Gentile-stranger  or 
domiciled,  take  no  interest  or  increase  of  him  ;  fear  God. — 
Let  thy  brother  live  with  thee."  ([II.  M.  25,  35.)— The 
Ebrew,  during  his  six  years  hiring  out,  could  not  be 
harshly  treated.  No  hard  slave-work,  or  any  maltreatment 
was  permitted.  (III.  M.  25,  39-44). — When  killed  he  was 
duly  avenged  by  the  law.  When  his  tooth  was  knocked 
out  he  went  out  free.  (II.  M.  21,  27). — His  free  wife  and 
children  were  not  at  the  mercy  of  a  harsh  or  a  lascivious 
master.  (II.  M.  21,  3,  and  III.  M.  25,  41).— His  daughter, 
when  sold,  was  to  be  married  to  the  master,  or  to  his  son, 
or  go  free  (II.  M.  21,  7,  etc.),  and  her  treatment  was  in  all 
things  humane.  (II.  M.  21,  9  and  10).— When  the  freed 
slave  left  he  was  to  get  a  portion  from  the  master's  flock 
and  corn  a.nd  wine,  according  to  means  (V.  M.  15,  14,) 
reminding  the  latter  of  his  having  been  once  poor  him- 
self. It  was  forbidden  to  enter  the  house  of  the  poor 
debtor  for  pawning  him,  leaving  the  latter  the  choice  of 
the  pawn  to  be  given,  which  pawn  had  to  be  returned  to 
the  owner  every  night.  (V.  M.  24,  10-14). — What  exquisite 
delicacy!  This  was  a  kind  of  exemption  law  in  favor  of 
the  poor;  the  lawgiver  reckoning  that  the  creditor  will 
get  tired  of  taking  and  returning  the  pawn,  and  give  it  up. 
A  widow's  garment  was  never  allowed  to  be  pawned,  nor 
could  the  grinding-mill  be  taken  away  (V.  M.  24,  6  and  17). 
The  requisites  of  life  were  thus  exempted  from  the  grip  of 


MOSES    AXD    MOHAMMED    ON    THE    SAME   TOPIC.  177 

the  creditor.  The  immigrant,  the  widow  and  orphan  were 
to  be  protected  at  court.  (Ibidem). — "  Do  not  withhold  the 
wages  from  the  hireling,  be  he  Ebrew  or  Gentile-stranger. 
Pay  him  on  the  same  day,  for  he  is  waiting  for  it,  and  he 
may  cry  unto  God  and  you  will  be  held  accountable." 
(V.  M.  24,  14  and  15.) — What  abroad  sympathy,  so  humane, 
yet  divine !  Divine,  because  so  broadly  humane,  including 
all  races  and  classes  and  creeds. 

Makkiage  and  Divorce. 

Look  close  to  (V.  M.  24,  1,  etc.)  What  a  nobility  of  senti- 
ment! The  lawgiver  protects  not  only  the  rights  of  the 
weak,  but  their  feelings  and  social  standing,  too.  Read : 
"iWhen  a  man  has  married,  and  having  found  some  blemish 
in  his  wife,  he  divorced  her,  whereupon  she  married 
another  man  and  was  divorced,  or  widowed  of  that  other 
one,  too,  then  her  first  husband  shall  not  remarry  her,  since 
she  has  been  the  wife  of  another."  There  is  here  a  fine 
feeling  of  the  proper  and  the  becoming.  May  be  that  it  is 
a  silent  protest  against  the  barbarous  custom  prevalent 
in  Arabia  (see  Michaeli's  Laws  of  Moses,  Vol.  II,  page  138, 
London,  1814),  according  to  which  remarriage  of  a  divorced 
wife  could  take  place  only  after  her  marriage  to  and  divorce 
from  a  second  husband!  The  Mosaic  lawgiver  sacrifices 
here  the  chance  of  a  home  for  the  divorced  woman  to  the 
gain  of  her  self-respect.  Let  her  not  be  treated  as  a 
milking  cow,  bought,  sold  and  bought  again. 

Moses  and  Mohammed  on  the  Same  Topic. 

Let  us  dwell  a  while  on  this  trait.  It  is  interesting  to 
follow  up  the  thoughts  of  great  legislators.  In  Arabia  and 
in  Judsea,  as  all  over  the  ancient  world,  women  were  mostly 
bought  by  their  husbands.  The  husbands,  therefore,  had 
the  privilege  of  sending  them  off  at  a  moment's  notice  ; 
then   they  went  free,    losing  their  husbands  and  gaining 

12 


178  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

their  freedom,  and  thereby  they  lost  nothing,  having  been 
originally  unfree.  Now  both  the  Ebrew  and  the  Arabian 
legislators  were  anxious  to  make  woman  gain  and  not  lose 
in  the  transaction.  They  could  not  curtail  the  husband's 
rights  to  divorce  her,  since  he  had  bought  her.  All  they  could 
do  was  to  impede  the  divorcement  and  warn  him  not  to  be 
hasty  in  the  usage  of  his  barbarous  privilege.  In  this 
sympathetic  desire  both  the  lawgivers  participated.  But 
they  took  different  roads  in  attaining  their  object. 
Mohammed,  by  his  adopting  the  mentioned  current  custom, 
meant  to  convey  the  following  advice  :  "  Fellow- Arabian, 
you  are  about  sending  away,  in  hot  haste,  your  life-com- 
panion. Now,  take  counsel  and  ponder  over  it,  for  to-morrow 
you  may  repent  it  and  wish  to  remarry  her.  But  Alahah 
will  punish  you.  You  will  not  be  allowed  to  remarry  her, 
except  after  she  has  been  the  wife  of  another  and  then 
divorced  from  him." — Thus  he  was  trying  to  sober  the 
husband  by  arousing  in  him  the  feelings  of  jealousy ;  and 
that  may  often  have  deterred  him  from  rash  divorcement. 
But  that  was  exceedingly  indelicate,  though  perhaps  often 
effective.  Good  enough  for  rough  times!  That  was  the 
custom  long  before  the  Koran  in  the  Arabian  world.  Now, 
the  biblical  lawgiver  could  follow  that  usage,  but  he  thought 
the  remedy  worse  than  the  evil.  It  was  repugnant  to  the 
ideal  of  "  Ye  shall  be  unto  me  a  holy  nation."  There  the 
priest  could  not  marry  a  divorced  woman;  Mohammed  did. 
The  Mosaic  community  revolted  against  that  proposition, 
and  believed  to  reach  the  same  object  by  the  cleaner  road, 
declaring :  ''  Be  not  hasty  in  divorcing  your  wife,  for  if  she 
marries  another  you  can  never  marry  her  again,  and  thus  you 
wrong  yourself  forever." — I  believe  there  is  here  bo,th  more 
delicacy  and  more  prudence  than  in  the  Arabian  mode. 
Here  is  another  law  of  great  delicacy,  viz : 


the  levirate  marriage.  179 

The  Levirate  Marriage. 

Among  the  Hindoos  and  Persians,  anciently,  and  yet  now 
among  Mongols,  Afghans,  etc.,  there  is  a  custom  requiring 
that  a  man  marries  the  wife  of  his  deceased  brother,  in 
order  to  raise  him  a  son  and  perpetuate  his  name.  That 
custom  prevailed,  too,  in  the  ancient  Ebrew  Commonwealth. 
Moreover,  as  there  the  lawgiver  desired  to  retain  each  acre 
and  cottage  in  the  original  family-group  this  constituted 
a  second  interest  for  retaining  the  widow  in  the  family  by 
having  her  marry  a  kinsman  of  the  deceased.  Hence  the 
law  (V.  M.  25,  5) :  "When  brothers  dwell  together,  and  one 
of  them  dies  childless,  but  leaves  a  wife,  then  shall  she  not 
marry  out  of  the  family ;  but  her  husband's  brother  shall 
marry  her,  and  the  first-born  son  by  that  marriage  shall 
bear  the  name  of  her  first  husband  (and  get  his  family-lot), 
that  the  latter  one's  name  shall  not  be  blotted  out  from 
among  Israel."  (^)  But  if  her  brother-in-law  refuses  to 
marry  her,  a  ceremony  shall  take  place  before  the  courts  to 
that  effect,  whereupon  she  is  free  to  dispose  of  herself.  Of 
course,  the  Rabbinical  law  amplifies  and  changes  greatly 
these  provisions.  (Eben  Ha-Eser,  156,  and  Ibamoth  ad 
locum). 

Here  we  find  a  custom  of  older  date  than  Mosaism  is, 
grown  out  of  the  agrarian  and  the  marriage  customs  of 
hoary  times,  when  the  entire  family  had  one  lot  and  one 
wife,  perhaps,  which  usage  of  Levirate-marriage  the  Bible 
allowed  to  stand,  but  modified,  restrained,  changed  and 
slowly  turned  to  such  account  as  to  bring  out  its  good  feat- 
ures, effacing  its  harsh  ones,  and,  moreover,  making  it 
optional.     Later,  the  Rabbis  finally  abolished  it. 

The  whole  is  brought  out  in  the  Bible  in  such  a  way  that 
we  almost  hear  the  heart  of  the  feeling  lawgiver  throbbing 
at  the  thought  of  a  man  dying  childless,  and  his  poor  widow 
wrangling  with  the  selfish  relatives,  and  about  to  be  turned 

.^Nic^'D  IDC'  nno'  N^    (1) 


180  SPIRIT    OF   THE   BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

into  the  cold  street,  or  to  ascend  the  burning  funeral  pile, 
as  in  Hindostan.  The  law  interfered,  therefore,  declaring: 
"  The  widow  shall  stay  in  the  family,  and  an  heir  be  raised 
to  her  deceased  husband." — The  conditions  are  foreign,  old 
and  rude,  but  the  feeling  and  the  sympathy  is  eternally 
fresh  and  humane. 

Naomi  and  Euth. 

To  sympathize  with  that  custom  in  our  far-away  times 
and  social  conditions,  we  need  but  to  read  over  the  beautiful 
idyl  of  Kuth  and  Naomi — one  of  the  noblest  gems  of  Sacred 
Writ.  A  poor  Ebrew  family,  during  a  famine,  leave  their 
country  and  their  acre  and  move  into  a  neighboring  heathen 
land.  The  two  sons  marry  there  from  among  the  Gentiles. 
Soon  father  and  sons  die  and  leave  each  a  widow. — The  old 
widow  determines  to  return  to  her  own  country  and  farm. 
Tenderly  she  persuades  one  of  her  widowed  daughters-in- 
law  to  stay  in  her  own  country,  and  this  after  many  hot 
tears  and  kind  words.  But  the  other  one,  Ruth,  persistingly 
declares  never  to  leave  her  old  mother-in-law,  whom  she 
would  follow  wherever  she  goes,  whose  country  she  will 
make  hers,  and  whose  God  will  be  hers;  she  will  follow 
her  and  work  and  toil  for  her,  and  glean  in  the  fields  and 
devote  herself  to  her  late  husband's  mother,  the  only  relic 
and  consolation  of  her  past  conjugal  happiness.  The  two 
widows  return  to  the  Judsean  village  and  acre.  Many  of 
the  old  neighbors  remember  Naomi.  "Alas !  I  am  no  longer 
Naomi,  the  sweet  one. — Call  me  'Bitter,'  for  my  lot  is 
bitter,  indeed,  now  !  " — Ruth  keeps  her  promise.  She  works 
and  toils  and  gleans  in  the  fields,  and  sacrifices  her  young 
beauty  and  her  fine  face  for  the  nobility  of  a  dutiful  life, 
consecrated  to  tender  reminiscences  and  to  charity  at  home, 
entirely  devoted  to  filial  piety.  Soon  she  is  rewarded 
grandly  and  nobly,  in  the  most  touching  and  the  most 
natural  way.  The  richest  man  in  the  place,  Boaz,  perchance 
a  distant  relation  of  the  family,  having  been  witness  of 


RACIAL    INTERMARRIAGE.  181 

Ruth's  purity,  lier  self-sacrifice  and  devotion,  takes  lier  as 
liis  spouse,  by  virtue  of  tlie  above-mentioned  custom  of 
Levirate  marriage,  and  one  of  the  late  descendants  of  the 
poor  Gentile  immigrant  Ruth  is  King  David,  the  "anointed 
of  the  Lord."  You  see  here,  as  in  many  other  passages,  the 
Bible  bears  no  prejudice  to  Gentiles,  when  good,  pure  and 
noble-hearted.  It  prohibited  intermarriage  with  the  Canaan- 
ites  because  of  their  barbarous  and  mean  idolatry,  of 
unchaste  and  cruel  customs,  doctrines  and  life — not  on 
account  of  race  or  blood.  Prince  Bismarck  recently  acknowl- 
edged to  have  connived  at  anti-Semitism  as  a  "  safety-valve 
to  save  capitalism."  That  "anti-Semitic  fury,"  a  shame  to 
an  enlightened  country  and  century,  renders  unhappy  half 
a  million  of  Germans,  victims  of  that  scourge,  and  totally 
ruins  several  millions  of  other  human  beings  in  the  neigh- 
boring Russian  countries — poor  souls  who  never  harmed 
Bismarck,  nor  even  know  the  meaning  of  anti-Semitism, 
Whereupon  he  smiles,  and  declares :  Jew  and  Gentile  shall 
intermarry  and  reconcile — on  the  graves  of  the  victims  and 
the  ruins  of  their  homes.  Ruth  and  Boaz,  however,  are  a 
match  consecrated  by  the  Bible,  cemented  by  devotion 
and  sacrifice,  not  by  "  blood  and  iron." 

Racial  Intermarriage. 

Here  is  another  law  of  great  moral  beauty,  of  universal 
sympathy  with  the  helpless  and  the  weak.  In  V.  Moses  21, 10, 
we  read  :  "  When  thou  goest  to  war  and  takest  many  prison- 
ers, among  whom  thou  seest  a  beautiful  woman,  thou  canst 
take  her — as  thy  wife."  Whereat  the  law  prescribes  that 
from  that  moment  she  is  no  longer  a  prisoner,  but  "  She  is 
to  be  brought  to  his  house;  a  month's  time  shall  be  given 
her  for  preparation  ;  she  shall  wear  no  longer  the  prisoner's 
dress ;  she  shall  be  allowed  to  mourn  over  her  parents ; 
then,  after  a  month  is  lapsed,  she  becomes  his  wife."  Now, 
"  Should  he,  thereafter,  not  like  her,  then  he  must  let  her 
go  wherever  she  pleases.    Sell  her  as  a  slave  he  cannot, 


182  SPIRIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

since  he  had  been  her  husband." — Compare  this  with  the 
treatment  of  captive  women  elsewhere,  even  in  our  own 
times  In  Kussia,  Turkey  or  Asia,  and  you  will  agree  that 
the  biblical  author  had  a  great  heart,  including  in  his 
sympathy  all  conditions,  races  and  countries.  You  will  see 
that  from  there  to  the  later  recommendation  in  the  New 
Testament,  "  Love  thy  enemy,"  the  transition  is  not  too  far. 
Moses  could  not  avoid  war,  from  his  purely  human  stand- 
point, but  he  mitigated  its  horrors.  Of  course,  the  Rabbis 
turned  that  law  rather  in  a  sense  to  impede  intermarriage, 
pointing  to  the  fact  that  disharmony,  etc.,  will  follow. 
Of  course,  with  their  bitter  experiences  in  view,  they  could 
not  think  otherwise.  Just  as  the  Jew  now  thinks  of  Bis- 
marck's proposition  of  intermarriage  coming  close  after 
inciting  to  anti-Semitism  and  ostracism. 

Piety  for  the  Dead  among  Greeks  and  Romans. 

That  sympathetic  anxiety  for  perpetuating  the  name  of 
the  dead,  as  seen  above  in  the  Pentateuch  and  the  story  of 
Ruth  and  Boaz,  is  akin  to  the  solicitude  of  the  ancients  ''  to 
burn  or  bury  the  bodies  of  those  slain  in  battle,  to  throw 
up  fresh  turf  upon  their  ashes,  erect  a  hillock,  even  offer 
sacrifices  over  their  graves," — so  tenderly  mentioned  by  all 
the  poets  of  Greece  and  Rome.  A  reminiscence  thereof — 
to-day  yet,  is  the  reading  of  solemn  Mass  in  the  Catholic 
Church,  the  recitation  of  the  Kaddish  prayer  in  the  syna- 
gogue, and  the  belief  in  Paradise,  by  both. 

The  idyl  of  Ruth  is  a  -beautiful  instance  of  ancient  pious 
regard  for  the  dead.  Let  us  now  look  for  some  examples 
from  Greek  and  Roman  poets. 

Virgil,  in  the  JEneid,  tenth  book,  narrates  as  a  noble 
trait  of  Turnus,  the  Latin  adversary  of  his  Trojan  hero, 
that  when  he  had  vanquished  and  killed  young  Pallas,  son 
of  King  Evander,  the  friend  of  ^neas,  he  exclaims :  "  Arca- 
dians, listen  to  and  remember  my  words  and  bring  them  to 
Evander.    I  send  him  back  Pallas,  such  as  he  has  deserved  it, 


PIETY    FOR  THE   DEAD.  183 

that' he  may  bestow  on  him  the  honors  of  the  grave  and  all 
those  funeral  duties,  which  may  console  him, — indeed,  he 
has  dearly  paid  for  the  hospitality  granted  to  the  Trojans.'X^) 
^neas,  thereupon  arriving  in  the  camp,  is  inconsolable 
over  the  death  of  young  Pallas,  the  son  of  his  friend,  old 
King  Evander.  With  his  terrible  sword  he  makes  a  fearful 
carnage  among  the  enemy  and  takes  eight  warriors  alive,  to 
offer  them  in  expiation  to  the  manes  of  Pallas,  who  with 
his  father  are  ever  present  to  the  mind  of  JEneas(^).  With 
especial  callousness  he  massacres  a  vanquished  enemy  who 
is  begging  for  his  life, — shouting :  "  Here  you  have  what 
the  manes  of  Anchises,  what  lulus  ask,  Pallas  being  dead."(^) 

In  the  same  book,  X.,  Virgil  narrates  the  death  of  fero- 
cious King  Mezentius  and  his  son.  The  first,  nigh  succumb- 
ing under  ^neas,  is  saved  by  his  young  son,  who  heroically 
dies  in  his  stead.  The  ferocious  sire  is  disconsolate  and 
pathetic  at  that  misfortune.  He  offers  himself  to  the 
strokes  of  his  antagonist  with  these  tender  words  :  "  Bitter 
enemy,  here,  now,  take  my  life,  without  committing  a 
crime,  for  I  wish  not  to  be  spared.  Yet,  if  the  van- 
quished may  hope  for  some  grace,  I  beg  thee  to  allow  some 
earth  to  cover  my  body,  and,  moreover,  suffer  that  I  rest  in 
the  same  tomb  with  my  son."(*) 

The  psychology  of  these  verses  is  particularly  fine,  and 
among  the  moderns  it  recalls  passages  of  Oorneille  and 
Victor  Hugo.    In  the  first  three  quotations,  uEneas,  the  soft, 

(1)  "Arcades,  hii^c,  inquit,  memores  mea  dicta  referte  Evandro:  qualem  meruit, 
Pallanta  remitto.  Quisquis  hoiios  tumuli,  quidquid  solamen  humandi  est,  Largior: 
haud  illi  stabunt  yEiieia  parvo  Hospitia."— Virg.  X,  491. 

(3)  "  Proxima  quitque  metit  jjladio,  latumque  per  agmen  Ardens  limitem  agit 
ferro;  tc,  Turne,  superbum  Cticde  nova  quivrens.  Pallas,  Evander,  in  ipsis  Omnia 
sunt  oculis,  mens.L'  quas  advena  ptimas  Tunc  adiit,  dextneque  dat<i?.  Sulmone 
creates  Quatuor  hie  juvenes,  totidcm  quos  educat  Ufens,  Viventes  rapit,  inl'erias 
quos  immolet  umbris,  Captivoque  rogi  perfundat  sanguine  llammas. " — Virg.  X,  513. 

(3)  "Belli  commercia  Turnus  Sustulit  ista  prior  jam  turn,  Pallante  pererato. 
Hoc  patris  Anchisic  Manes,  hoc  sentit  lulus.  Sic  fatus  galeam  loeva  tenet,  atque 
reflexa  Ccrvicc  orantis  capulo  tenus  applicat  cnsem."— Virg.  X,  534. 

(4)  "  Hostis  amare,  (luid  inerepitas,  mortemque  minaris?  Nullum  in  cajde 
nefas;  nee  sic  ad  pni'lia  vcni.  Nee  tecum  meus  hivc  pepigit  mihi  fwdera  Lausus. 
Unum  hoc,  per,  si  qua  est  victis  venla  hostibus,  oro.  Corpus  humo  patiare  tegi,  .  .  . 
Et  me  consortem  nati  concede  sepulcro. ' '—Virg.  X,  900. 


184  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  pious  and  tlie  humane,  is  so  cruel  and  ferocious,  so 
strikingly  contrary  to  his  nature,  because  of  the  death  of 
Pallas,  who,  he  thinks,  deserves  all  the  victims  now  falling 
by  his  own  sword.  Even  "prisoners'  blood  shall  flow  over 
the  flames  of  his  funeral  pile."  (^Eneas,  X.,  520).  Whilst 
the  last  passage  of  Mezentius  is  striking  by  the  contrary 
trait ;  he  is  hated  by  his  own  kin ;  chased  away  by  his  sub- 
jects, followed  only  by  his  son,  who  sacrifices  himself  to 
save  the  hard-hearted  father.  He,  usually  so  selfish,  savage 
and  brutal,  is  here,  in  this  instance,  all  tenderness,  love  and 
pathos.  Though  out  of  the  reach  of  the  enemy,  he  yet 
returns  to  the  battle-field,  not  to  conquer,  but  to  die,  asking 
of  his  victor  as  a  last  and  only  favor,  to  be  honorably 
buried,  and  at  the  side  of  his  devoted  son.  That  is  of 
grand  pathos,  and  true  to  nature.  The  ferocious  Mezentius, 
in  presence  of  his  dead  son,  dead  in  his  defence,  dead  for 
him  whom  everyone  else  hated  and  who  hated  everyone 
else,  is  suddenly  turned  into  a  humane,  loving  being;  he  is 
overcome  for  the  first  time  in  his  life,  by  a  tender  feeling, 
piety  for  his  dead  child.  For  once  he  feels  what  it  is  to 
love,  to  admire  and  to  have  been  loved — and  this  supreme 
moment  is — his  last  one ! — In  Corneille  and  in  Victor  Hugo 
we  find  often  happy  imitations  of  the  great  Virgil. 

The  Sublime  Among  the  Classics  and  the  Moderns. 
In  "  Polyeuote  "(^)  and  in  "  Horace  "{^)  Corneille  attains 

(1)    Polyeucte  V,  3. 

Je  vous  I'ai  deja  dit,  et  vous  le  dis  encore, 
Vivez  avec  Severe,  ou  moui'ez  avec  moi. 
Je  ne  meprise  point  vos  pleurs,  ni  votre  foi; 
Mais,  de  quoi  que  pour  vous  notre  amour  m'entretienue, 
Je  ne  vous  connais  plus,  si  vous  n'etes  chretleune. 
(3)    Horace  III,  6. 

Horace:    Nous  venez-vous,  Julie,  apprendre  la  victoire  ? 

Julie :    Mais  plutot  du  combat  les  funestes  effets. 

Horace :    Rome  n'est  point  sujette,  ou  mon  fils  est  sans  vie: 

Je  conuais  mieux  mon  sang,  il  salt  mieux  son  devoir. 
Julie :    Que  vouliez-vous  qu'il  fit  contre  trois "? 
Hoi-ace:    Qu'il  mourut,     .     .     . 

N'eut-il  que  d'un  moment  recule  sa  defaite,     .    .     . 
II  eut  avec  honneur  laisse  mes  cheveux  gris, 
Et  c'etait  de  sa  vie  un  assez  digne  prix. 


THE   SUBLIME   AMONG   THE   CLASSICS   AND    MODERNS.        185 

at  such  sublime  effects.  In  "  Le  roi  s'  amuse,"  "  Lucretia 
Borgia,"  and  in  "Notre  Dame,"  Victor  Hugo  reaches  that 
climax.  That  sublimest  of  effects,  that  deepest  thrill  of 
our  noblest  passions  the  poet  appears  to  reach  in  uniting 
into  one  and  the  same  instance  the  terrible  and  the  tender. 
Such  is  ^neas  dealing  his  fearful  death-blows  around,  yet 
aiming  but  at  appeasing  the  shadow  of  young  Pallas, 
inanimate,  and  of  soothing  his  father,  disconsolate;  or 
Mezentius  receiving  his  last  stroke,  asking  of  his  victor  the 
favor  of  a  burial  at  the  side  of  his  only  beloved  son. — 
Here  are  the  terrible  and  the  tender  united ;  at  once 
excruciating  pain  and  sweet  gratification,  horror  and  delight. 
Here  is  the  sublime.  That  brings  our  noblest  soul-strings 
into  vibration.  This  is  the  highest  of  the  poetic  art.  This 
but  the  greatest  masters,  Virgil,  Shakspeare,  Schiller, 
Corneille,  Victor  Hugo,  etc.,  know  how  to  reach.  It  is  the 
sanctum  sanctorum  of  poetry. 

Another  reminiscence  strikes  me,  just  parallel  to  this, 
coming  from  the  far-off  past :  When  a  young  man,  I 
recollect  to  have  found  in  a  Roumanian  poet,  of  blessed 
memory,  my  friend,  Dimitriu  Bolintineanu,  such,  heautiful 
passages,  uniting  the  tender  and  the  terrible  to  a  high  pitch. 
I  have  not  the  book  at  hand  to  quote ;  be  his  name  here 
remembered  with  gratitude. 

Victor  Hugo  reached  that  pitch  in  depicting  a  grand, 
profligate  duchess;  having  poisoned  at  a  banquet  her 
enemies,  and  fiendishly  rejoicing  over  it,  she  discovers  that 
her  only,  long  lost  and  sincerely  beloved  son  is  among  her 
poisoned  enemies. — Her  despair  and  remorse  are  exceedingly 
pathetic. — In  another  drama  the  same  poet  hits  a  great 
moment  in  the  scene,  when  a  father  opening  the  sack 
presumingly  containing  the  murdered  ravisher  of  his  dear 
child,  full  of  hellish,  yet  natural  glee,  finds  there  instead — 
his  poor  dead  child  herself,  dead  to  save  the  life  of  her 
ravisher ! — The  most  pathetic,  I  think,  is  in  a  historic  novel 


186  SPIEIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

by  the  same  poet.  There  we  meet  a  beggarwoman,  long 
mourning  over  her  child — stolen  in  infancy  "by  gypsies — 
who  gets  hold  of,  and  delivers  in  revenge,  to  the  execu- 
tioner, an  innocent  gypsy  girl,  which  girl,  whilst  dying,  is 
found  to  be  her  own  long-lost  child. — Shakespeare  has 
often  reached  that  climax  of  the  sublime;  the  tender, 
there,  being  often  subordinate  to  the  terrible.  That  is 
well  known.     But  let  us  return  to  our  subject  proper. 

Funeral  Piety  in  Homer. 

Homer  reports  many  cases  of  pious  regard  for  the  dead, 
their  own,  or  their  relations'  keen  desire  for  their  obtain- 
ing a  becoming  burial;  with  accompanying  funeral-rites, 
offerings,  sacrifices,  libations,  incense,  precious  oil,  flowers, 
tears  and  lamentations,  with  their  habitual  arms,  favorite 
horses,  oftentimes  even  with  some  favorite  attendants.  It 
was  such  passages  in  ancient  authors  which  suggested  to 
Herbert  Spencer  his  hypothesis  about  the  sacrificial  service, 
etc.,  which,  according  to  him,  originated  in  by-gone  pre- 
historic times  in  the  naive  and  pious  offerings  of  food  to 
dead  ancestors.  Later  they  were  raised  to  the  gods,  divine 
worship  was  paid  them  by  posterity,  and  such  offerings 
were  continued  to  divinized  heroes  and  remote  tribal  patri- 
archs. Such  rites  and  such  feelings  we  find  often  reported 
in  Homer.  Odysseus,  for  instance,  is  ordered  to  make  a 
journey  to  the  realms  of  Hades,  the  kingdom  of  the  nether 
deities  and  the  ghosts,  to  offer  them  sacrifices  and  con- 
sult them  about  the  ways  how  to  appease  the  superior 
gods,  and  reach  home  after  his  long  wanderings  since 
the  siege  of  Troy.  He  says  :  ''  There  Perimedes  and  Eury- 
lochos  held  the  victims,  whilst  I  drew  the  sword  from  my 
side  and  dug  a  pit  of  the  largeness  of  an  ell,  and  filled  it 
with  a  libation  to  all  the  dead ;  first  with  a  honey-mixture, 
then  with  sweet  wine,  at  last  with  water,  and  thereat  I  threw 
in   some  white  barleymeal.      Then   I  prayed   and  vowed 


BIBLICAL    AND   CLASSICAL   FUNERAL   EITES.  187 

to  all  the  unsteady-heads  of  the  dead,  that  when  I  had 
returned  to  Ithaca,  a  young  cow,  the  best  one,  should  be 
sacrificed  to  them  in  the  palace,  and  to  fill  the  fire-altar 
with  costly  gifts,  and  for  Teiresias  alone  I  shall  offer  a 
black  sheep.  Having  prayed  to  them,  I  took  the  sheep  and 
cut  their  throats  over  the  pit,  and  the  black  blood  flowed 
therein.  Thereupon  came  crowding  all  the  souls  of  the 
departed,  coming  from  Erebus  :  virgins,  youths,  much-tried 
old  men,  tender,  mourning  girls,  war-slaughtered  men  with 
stained  armor.  These  came  around  the  pit,  in  large  numbers, 
from  all  directions,  and  with  great  noise.  Pale  fear  took 
hold  of  me."  {^) 

Biblical  and  Classical  Funeeal  Rites. 

Here  I  wish  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that,  whilst  the 
Bible  remembers  the  dead  with  a  feeling  of  resignation  and 
quiet  tenderness,  and  whilst,  with  the  Romans,  we  find  on  such 

(1).       'EvT?'  iepffia  fiev  Jlepi/ir/deg  EvpiiXoxo^  ~£ 
ecxov-  kyu  f5'  hop  o^v  ipvaadftevog  wapd  fj.rjpov 
l36d-pov  6pv^'  haaov  re  Tvvyovacov  ivd^a  Kal  kvd^a, 
dfi^'  avT(f  6e  x^W  X^^F^  Trdacv  veTiveaaiv, 
TvpuTa  fieTiLKpTjTif),  fXETewsiTa  6e  ^dei  olvu, 
TO  Tp'iTov  av'^'  iidarc  ■  etvl  6'  a.?ixj)iTa  ?i,evKd  TraKwov. 
*     TToXAd  de  yoxjvou^irjv  vekvoiv  a^evrjva  Kdprjva, 
kTi-Buv  elg  'I-&dKT/v  ardpav  (3ovv,  yrig  dpioTij, 
pi^Eiv  £v  fieydpaim  -Kvprpj  r'  runrlrjcefiev  ectiJauv, 
Teipealy  6'  aTvdvEV&ev  b'iv  lepEvaE/xEV  olu 
TvafifiE/iav' ,  Of  fii/AoiCi.  jiETairpETiEc  y/iETipoiaiv. 
Tovg  tT  eiret  Evx^^yci  Turrjal  te,  sd^vsa  vsKpuv,  ' 

EXTiiadfiTjv^  Ta  6k  fifjTia  ?m(3uv  dTrsSEipoTo/iT/ca 
kg  fio^pov,  pEE  (T  aifxa  KE?iaiv£<j>kg  •  di  6'  aykpovTO 
■^x<u  vKE^  'Epk^Evg  VEKVuv  Ka-aTE'&vrjOiTuv. 
\y'vn^aL  t'  7]i-&Eoi  te  Tvo'kvT'kTiToi  Tt  yepovTEg 
nap-&EviKai  r'  aTa}.ai  vsowEV&ka  ■dvjibv  Exovaai 
noTCkol  (V  ovrdfiEvoi  ;\;a/lK%>e^<v  kyx^iycfiv, 
dv6pEg  dptji(paT0i  fiE^poTu^kva  te'vxe  kxovTEg  ■ 
01  TToXkol  TTEpl  [id'&pov  k(j)oiTuv  aA,'Ao-&EV  dTiAog 
■dsaKEaii)  laxir  kfik  6£  x^-(^pi>v  6kog  »Jp«.] — Odyss.  XI,  23-43. 


188  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

occasions  the  terrible  and  the  tender  mingled  together,  we 
see  in  Homer  to  these  two  elements  a  third  one  added,  viz.? 
that  of  the  funny.  Or  do  we  find  it  funny  because  we  do 
not  believe  in  it?  Reading  that  poet,  we  imagine  to  see 
him  chuckle  between  the  lines.  A  kind  of  tragic-comical 
narrative  seems  to  be  Odysseus'  descent  into  Hades  and  his 
talk,  etc.,  with  the  ghosts.  But  is  it  so  ?  Is  it  not  possible 
that  in  those  remote  times  that  was  all  real  earnest? 
Indeed,  could  the  ancient  bard  have  intended  to  make  his 
leading  hero  ridiculous?  That  is  hardly  probable.  More 
plausible  is  that  it  was  meant  in  earnest,  and  that  the  old 
Greeks  did  believe  in  it.  And  that  would  constitute  a  dark 
spot  in  Greek  civilization,  indeed.  The  deep  hatred  the 
Bible  entertains  for  these  rites  and  practices,  the  sarcasm 
the  prophets  constantly  launched  against  them,  seem  to 
show  that  the  heathen  world  was  very  puerile  in  many 
respects.  Indeed,  what  a  hocus-pocus!  These  funeral  sacri- 
fices may  be,  as  alluded  to  before,  the  rudimentary  origin 
of  the  later  pagan,  widespread  sacrificial  services  so  much 
insisted  upon  by  priests  and  so  little  thought  of  by  the 
biblical  prophetic  school ;  so  much  so  that  Samuel  already 
thundered  down  poor,  anxious  King  Saul  with  :  "  Behold-' 
to  obey  is  preferable  to  slaughter  offerings  (I.  Samuel 
15,  22) ;  to  hearken,  better  than  fat  rams."(^)  The  Homeric 
prophet,  Teiresias,  is  not  so  outspoken  as  Samuel.  At  the 
invocation  of  Odysseus  he  makes,  duly,  his  appearance. 
Stalking  with  a  golden  sceptre  in  his  hand,  he  eagerly  asks 
for  the  proffered  blood,  saying :  "  Step  back  from  the  pit 
and  take  off  thy  sharp  sword  that  I  may  drink  of  the  blood 
and  tell  thee  the  truth."f)     Of  course,  he  tells  him  the 

•  D'^'K  2^n»  y^\>Th  mt2  nnrc  yoK'  r\:r[   (i) 

(3).        "Rl^E  6'  tiri  ijwx>)  Q>/(3aiov  TLEipeaiao, 

Xpiiaeov  anfjTVTpov  £;^wv,  efie  6'  eyvu  Koi  Trpoahcirev  .... 

ak?i'  a~oxa.^£0  /3(^i?pov,  awiaxE  ^£  (haayavov  6.f  i', 

nijuarog  o(j)pa  tt/w  kcu  toi  v?/fispTta  eIku. — Odyss.  XI,  90. 


BIBLICAL   AND    CLASSICAL   FUNERAL   RITES.  189 

truth.  Just  such  a  "hocus-pocus^^  as  the  entire  rite  is;  a 
pompous  specimen  of  the  stupidities  and  abominable 
cruelties  of  those  heathen  forms  of  worship  so  justly 
denounced  in  the  Ebrew  sacred  books. 

Among  the  numerous  visitors  in  Hades  had  come  also  the 
mother  of  Odysseus.  She,  too,  was  very  hungry,  and 
eagerly  had  asked  for  the  blood-offering;  but  her  son 
warded  her  off  with  the  sharp  sword  until  first  the  sooth- 
sayer, Teiresias,  had  taken  his  share.  Then  only  came 
her  turn.  She  did  not  stand  upon  ceremonies.  She  came 
again,  after  the  prophet,  drank  of  the  blood  and  at  once 
recognized  her  son.(^)  Before  partaking  of  the  food  she  did 
not ;  she  then  gave  him  her  motherly  advice. 

Herbert  Spencer's  hypothesis  appears  to  be  strongly 
confirmed  by  such  passages,  viz :  the  dead  were  simply 
persons  sleeping  in  their  tombs,  shadowy  and  weak, 
trembling  and  shaking  their  heads  for  want  of  food. — 
As  soon  as  they  drank  of  the  blood  of  the  victims  they 
felt  refreshed,  remembered  their  friends  and  gave  them 
good  advice.  Most  pathetically  Odysseus'  mother  closes 
her  long  discourse  with  the  thrilling  words :  "  I  did  not 
die  of  sickness,  but  from  longing  for  thee,  musing  about 
thee,  Odysseus.  My  tender  love  for  thee  has  deprived 
me  of  sweet  life."(~}  Here  again  is  an  honest  word  of  nature, 
which  finds  a  thrilling  response  in  our  souls.  It  is  not 
artificial,  no  mythology.  One  passage  more  and  our  Greek 
parallels  will  be  at  an  end.  Among  the  many  pale  visitors 
came  also  Elpenor,  one  of  Odysseus'  companions.  He  had 
been,  as  all  of  them,  entertained  at  the  house  of  Kirke,  the 

(1).        "iif  (pa/jevr/  if'vxv  fJfv  CfS//  dofwv  Wi(5iic  dau 

Teipecrtao-      ....     t:Tri  fiyrr/p 

yXv&g  nal  TTiEv  aifia  KeAaive^tq-  avTina  6'  kyvu, 

Kai.  //  t'TTta  irpoajMvSa-  — Odyss.,  XI,  150. 
(2).  ovTE  Tit;  oi'v  fiot  vovaoq  enriTivdev,  i/Te  /ja/jaTa  .... 

d/l/l«  fie  a6g  te  7r(5i?of  ad  te  fiydea^  .... 

ci]  f  ayavotppoai'vri  jieT^uiSla  f}v/uuv  arif/rpa.'^ — Odys.  XI,  200. 


190  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

famous  witcli,  drank  too  much,  fell  down  from  the  roof, 
died,  was  left  there  unburied,  and  hence,  according  to  the 
ideas  of  those  times,  could  not  be  admitted  into  Hades  till 
his  body  was  inhumed.  He  pleads  for  such  a  burial,  and 
finds  us  sympathetic.  "  I  pray  thee,  now,  on  my  knees,  by 
those  thou  didst  leave  behind,  by  thy  wife,  by  thy  father, 
who  reared  thee,  by  Telemachus,  whom  thou  didst  leave  as 
thy  only  son  in  the  palace,  ...  I  pray  that  thou 
rememberest  me.  Going  away  hence,  don't  let  me  remain 
there  unwept  and  unburied;  that  the  gods  should  not  be 
wroth  at  you  on  account  of  me;  but  bury  me  with  my  arms 
and  make  me  a  hillock  at  the  shore  of  the  gray  sea ;  for 
me,  the  unhappy  man,  that  future  generations  should 
remember  me."( ) 

Thus  the  unfortunate  Elpenor  prays  for  burial  and  a  monu- 
ment "  that  he  may  be  remembered  by  future  generations." 
Just  as  in  the  Bible:  "The  first  son  of  the  Levirate  mar- 
riage shall  represent  the  deceased  kinsman  (the  widow's  first 
husband),  that  his  name  shall  not  die  out."  (^)  Is  that  not 
wonderful !  Seemingly  there  is  such  a  vast  distance  between 
Greece  and  Judaea;  so  much  prejudice,  so  much  misunder- 
standing.— Yet  after  all,  the  genuine  tones  of  nature,  at  the 
very  spring  of  the  soul,  before  they  are  overlaid  with  the 
varnish  of  superstition  and  hypocrisy, — such  tones  are  identi- 
cal !  In  Homer  and  in  the  Bible  we  find  the  same  cravings, 
same   hopes   and  aspirations,  viz :    The   dead   wish   to   be 

(1).  vvv  de  ce  ruv  omd'ev  yovva^o/xai,  ov  irapeovruv, 

7ip6g  t'  a7i6xov  kuI  Tvarpbg,  o  &  STpe<pe  rvT'&bv  kovra, 

T/jle/idxov  ■&',  bv  fiovvov  kvl  fieydpoiaiv  IT^enveg-  .... 

kv^a  a'  ETTELTa,  ava^,  KsXafiai  fivt^aaad^ai  ejieIo- 

fii]  fi'  CLKkavTov^  ad-aiTTOv,  libv  brnd-ev  /cara/le/'Trew, 

voa(pia^£ig,  fi^  roi  re  -dewv  fiyvi/xa  ysvufiai, 

a/l/ld  /IE  KanKTJai  cbv  TEvx£<yifi,  aaaa  fioi  kariv^ 

cf]\ia  T£  fioL  xevai  7vo?u7'/g  k-nrl  ^tvl  -^aT^aaaTig, 

avdpbg  6v(yT?/voio,  Kal  eaoofievoiat.  Trv^eo&ar — Otlyss.,  XI,  65-76. 

V.  M.  25,  6.— .^Nic'^D  itDK'  nno-  N'!?i  ,nDn  DB'  hv  Dip"'    (3) 


BIBLICAL    REVERENCE.  191 

remembered  to  posterity.  The  living  feel  piety  and  tender- 
ness for  the  dead.  Homer  bespeaks  for  them  a  grave  and 
funeral  rites  and  a  monument.  The  Bible  legates  to  them, 
children  to  bear  their  name,  cultivate  their  acre,  and  occupy 
their  cottage.  Here  we  find  the  source  of  the  immortality- 
idea  with  Heathen,  Jew,  Christian  and  Mohammedan.  The 
Hindoo  sage  aspires  to  Nirvana,  or  absorption  in  God.  The 
biblical  nations  crave  for  posterity,  and  shudder  at  annihila- 
tion. Curious!  Semite,  Turanian  and  Arian  now  coincide 
in  the  West  in  this  instance. 

Biblical  Reverence. 

This,  apparently,  wonderful  coincidence  between  Arians, 
Turanians  and  Semites,  between  Christian,  Mohammedan 
and  Ebrew  peoples  of  to-day,  having  the  same  hopes  and 
aspirations  to  commemorate  the  past  generations,  and  be 
remembered  by  the  future  ones,  this  fidelity  to  the  dead 
and  to  the  living,  equally  entertained  by  present  nations 
of  divers  creeds  and  origins,  is  most  naturally  and  easily 
explained .  We  have  but  to  remember  that  all  those  three  sets 
of  races  have  been  nursed  at  the  breast  of  the  same  Book, 
and  that  piety  to  the  departed,  and  those  unborn,  is  one  of 
the  leading  traits  of  that  book.  The  Bible  does  not  expressly 
teach  the  doctrine  of  human  immortality.  But  it  does 
more ;  it  conceives  mankind  as  one  huge  tree,  the  different 
races  as  its  branches,  and  the  different  generations  as  the 
blossoms,  leaves  and  fruits  of  the  divers  seasons  and  crops 
of  the  one  and  the  same  arbor.  Therefore  is  each  and  every 
individual  person  part  and  parcel  thereof,  and  each  is  in 
duty  and  reality  bound  to  consider  himself  as  such,  and  con- 
stantly act  as  such,  viz :  to  have  regard  for  the  past  and 
the  future,  and  be  faithful  to  those  gone  by  and  those  to 
come, — that  is  the  law  of  the  biblical  solidarity ;  solidarity 
not  only  within  the  limits  of  the  same  State  and  genera- 
tion, but  solidarity  and  responsibility  between  the  mem- 


192  SPIRIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

bers  of  the  generations  present,  and  those  of  the  past  and 
the  future  centuries. 

This  feeling  of  unison  of  all  mankind  and  all  centuries, 
vaguely  pervading  the  civilized  and  refined  of  all  times, 
found  its  most  solemn  expression  in  the  Decalogue  (II.  M. 
20,  12),  where  it  stands  forth  in  grand  relief.  After  the 
solemn  declaration  of  the  unity  and  spirituality  of  the 
Deity,  connected  with  and  revealed  to  man  through  the 
Sabbath,  the  day  of  rest  and  sanctification,  the  lawgiver 
solemnly  enjoins  parental  reference.  "Honor  thy  father 
and  thy  mother,  that  thy  days  may  be  long  upon  the  land 
God  is  giving  thee." — Now,  parental  reverence  is  filial  piety, 
is  piety  for  the  dead  and  fidelity  to  the  unborn.  To  respect 
the  ancestors  is  taking  into  consideration  the  unborn  genera- 
tions. Again,  reverencing  our  fathers  is  the  pledge  of  being 
considered  by  posterity.  Parental  piety  affirms  the  family, 
secures  the  nation,  establishes  the  country,  and  thus  secures 
the  offspring.  Hence,  reverence  for  those  preceding  us  safe- 
guards the  coming  generations ;  it  is  the  connecting  bridge 
between  past,  present  and  future. 

This  fifth  commandment,  passing  over  from  the  natural 
religion  of  antiquity  to  the  positive  religion  of  Sinai,  sunk 
deeply  into  the  human  heart.  From  the  Ebrew  it  passed  to 
the  Christian  and  the  Mohammedan,  to  the  civilized  in 
general.  For  long  cejituries  it  was  specially  established 
among  the  biblical  people.  When  that  people  lived  yet  in 
the  European  and  Asiatic  Ghetto,  in  the  gloom  of  poverty 
and  wretchedness,  during  long  ages  gone  by,  this  precious 
family  solidarity,  this  noble  fidelity  to  the  dead  and  the 
living,  this  reverence  for  parents  and  love  of  kindred,  was 
the  only  sunshine  of  that  ghetto,  the  only  redeeming 
feature  of  that  social  Tartarus,  invented  by  popular  stupid- 
ity and  priestcraft.  Parental  reverence  was  the  mystic  gem 
illumining  and  cheering  that  night  of  the  Ebrew  middle- 
ages.     It  was  that  love,  devotion  and  adherence  to  prede- 


JULES   SIMON.  193 

• 

cessors,  kindred  and  posterity,  the  reverence  of  the  chil- 
dren to  parents,  the  love  of  parents  to  descendants.  At  a 
time  when  everything  Ebraic  was  decriecl,  hooted  and 
derided,  parental  reverence  and  fidelity  to  the  dead  and  the 
living  was  its  redeeming  feature,  was  respected  and  admired 
by  the  entire  world,  and  slowly  it  was  learned  by  the  world; 
it  was  acquired  by  Arian  and  Turanian.  Slowly  the  Teu- 
tonic nations,  the  Latin,  Slav  and  Mongol  races,  made  it 
their  own.  And  that  plant,  nurtured  with  tears  and  kisses 
at  the  Ebraic  ghetto,  became  the  brightest  flower  of  civil- 
ized mankind,  an  organized  feature  in  man's  physiognomy, 
adorning  the  halls  and  the  drawing-rooms  of  the  Latin  and 
German  count,  the  English  earl  and  the  Slav  hoyar,  as  well 
as  the  peasant's  hut. 

Jules  Simon. 

May  this  ever  be  its  crowning  glory,  and  may  this  gem 
never  be  plucked  from  civilized  man's  diadem ;  but  I  fear 
recent  nihilism  has  partly,  already,  tarnished  it.  Sometimes 
it  appears  as  if  the  fragrance  of  that  costly  flower  be 
already  evaporated  and  its  colors  faded.  There  is  some- 
thing in  our  modern  way  of  understanding  liberty  and 
equality  which  tends  to  fade  and  rot  that  flower,  to  uproot 
all  reverence  and  love  for,  all  veneration  and  devotion  to  past 
or  future,  to  parent  or  descendant ;  to  scoff  at  the  wrinkles 
of  the  mother  and  the  tears  of  the  babe,  which  creates 
impatience  and  insubordination,  coldness  and  indifference, 
selfishness  and  self-sufficiency, — the  doctrine  of :  ^^ After  me 
the  deluge^''  concentrating  all  upon  the  Ego  and  the  present, 
and  caring  for  nothing  but  the  dear  self  and  the  gratifica- 
tion of  the  hour.     That  is  the  nihilism  of  the  family. 

Mr.  Jules  Simon,  the  well-known  French  Minister  of  edu- 
cation, a  great  statesman,  philosopher  and  writer,  is  of 
the  opinion  that  the  sense  of  reverence  for  the  noble  and 
the  good,  that  parental  respect,  filial  piety  or  fidelity  to  the 

13 


194  SPIRIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

dead  and  tlie  living,  with  the  solidarity  of  the  family  are 
strongly  on  the  wane.  And,  mark  it  well,  reader,  he  claims 
that  this  process  of  family-deterioration  is  having  its  focus 
in  our  beloved  United  States  of  America,  and  that  from 
here  it  is  invading  Europe. 

The  Baltimore  Sun,  of  the  14th  April,  1892,  brought  out 
the  weighty  utterances  of  Mr.  Jules  Simon  in  this  regard.  I 
quote  here  the  following  verbatim.  After  having  unfolded 
the  sweet  picture  of  the  adherence,  cohesion  and  mutual 
respect  of  the  family  members  of  by-gone  times,  Mr.  Jules 
Simon  says :  "  Again  I  fancy  to  myself  a  family  of  persons, 
pressed  and  busy,  who  disdain  everything  that  is  not  new, 
and  trample  upon  everything  which  might  interfere  with 
their  'progress.'  The  father  and  mother  have  merely  con- 
sented to  marry  one  another  as  a  business  of  convenience ; 
finding  marriage  too  heavy ;  .  .  .  they  go  to  the  magis- 
trate ....  declaring  that  they  love  in  other  places. 
The  children  do  not  bear  the  yoke  of  obedience,  as  in  that 
age  when  it  was  absolutely  necessary  that  they  be  guided 
and  protected.  Being  yet  supported — by  the  parents — this 
is  the  only  band  binding  them  to  the  parents.  The  strong 
and  holy  bond  of  former  years  has  given  place  to  the  mar- 
riage of  adventure,  facilitated  by  the  divorce  .  .  guard- 
ianship .  .  .  boarding-house  and  emancipation  from 
family  control.  .  .  .  The  family  is  further  deserted  for 
the  club,  the  games  of  chance,  the  out-door  meals,  .  .  • 
the  Exchange,  the  fine  hotels,  the  dinners.  .  .  .  Eman- 
cipation is  good,  but  too  much  is  not  good."  ...  So  far 
Jules  Simon  on  Nihilism  in  the  family. 

The  Cave  of  Machpelah. 

From  this  picture  of  "  trilUant  wretchedness "  and  the 
neglect  of  family-piety,  let  us  pass  to  its  reverse,  the 
solemn,  yet  inspiring  scene,  in  Genesis,  23,  of  a  model 
family ;  still  suggesting  all  the  purity,  nobility,  affection  and 


THE   CAVE   OF   MACHPELAH.  195 

mutual  self-sacrifice  of  tlie  conjugal  ideal,  as  expressed  in 
the  legend  of  Eve  cut  out  from  the  side  of  Adam,  with 
the  pointed  moral  of :  "  Therefore  shall  man  leave  his 
father  and  mother  and  cling  to  his  wife  and  become  one 
person."     (Gen.  II.  24). 

There — I.  M.  23 — we  read  :  "  And  the  life  of  Sarah  was  a 
hundred  and  twenty  and  seven  years;  and  Sarah  died  at 
Hebron,  in  Canaan ;  and  Abraham  came  to  mourn  and  shed 
tears  over  Sarah  ;  then  he  arose  and  bought  an  hereditary 
burial-place,  the  Gave  of  Machpelah,  paying  its  full  price, 
acquiring  it  for  ever,  as  a  burial-place  for  the  family." 
Look  how  weighty  and  solemn,  yet  quiet,  serene  and  manly 
are  these  words  and  verses,  as  if  to  impress  us  with  the  import 
of  this  model  pair  and  model  family  picture,  this  paragon  of 
suave  and  manly  piety  for  the  dead.  One  hundred  and 
twenty-seven  years  she  had  lived  at  his  side — first  as  a 
child  and  kindred,  then  as  his  consort;  had  clung  to  the 
chequered  fortunes  of  an  innovator,  an  initiator ;  had  shared 
in  his  battles  and  struggles,  obloquies,  failures  and  poverty; 
shared  in  his  exile,  wanderings  and  vicissitudes  of  fortune ; 
slowly  rose  with  him  to  afiluence,  wealth,  renown  and  great- 
ness, thus  fighting  his  battles,  ever  cheering,  smiling, 
hoping,  inspiring,  persevering. — She  now  breathed  her  last 
in  his  arms.  .  .  .  Well  deserving  his  tears,  his  respect, 
a  place  for  her  dust  to  mingle  with  his,  the  worthy  consort 
of  a  providential  man. 

The  ancient  Syrians,  Canaanites  and  Egyptians  knew 
no  more  sacred  duty  of  the  living  than  to  provide  for 
the  dead ;  and  their  precautions  were  indeed  extraordinary. 
They  built  their  graves  as  if  for  eternity.  Kings  and 
princes  built  during  lifetime  their  residences  of  here- 
after. Towers  and  gigantic  structures  they  erected  over 
their  last  abode.  The  Pyramids,  the  most  astonishing  works 
of  ancient  times,  seem  to  have  had  for  their  chief  aim  the 
security  of  the  rest  of  the  dead.    The  greatest  misfortune 


196  SPIRIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

that  could  befall  an  individual  or  a  nation  was  to  have  the 
rest  of  their  dear  ones  rudely  interrupted.  The  mass  of  the 
people  had  their  burial-place  in  subterranean  caves.  These 
were  either  naturally  or  purposely  hewn  in  the  rock,  in 
order  to  defy  destruction.  These  catacombs  generally 
consisted  of  one  spacious  chamber  or  hall,  lit  up  only  by 
an  aperture  at  the  top,  giving  to  the  whole  a  mysterious 
half -darkness,  fit  for  the  sacred  repose  of  the  dead.  Along- 
side the  walls  there  were  niches,  each  containing  one  sar- 
cophagus. Sometimes  the  hall  led  into  another  chamber 
or  a  long  corridor,  the  walls  of  which  were  lined  with 
coffins,  each  standing  upon  pedestals.  Sometimes  the  cave 
had  again  another  cave  beneath,  accessible  by  a  staircase, 
having  thus  one  burial-ground  upon  another.  Perhaps  the 
"  Cave  of  Machpelah "  was  such  a  double  cave,  kafol 
meaning  double.  The  door  used  to  be  closed  by  a  huge 
stone,  requiring  several  persons  to  remove  it.  The  original 
meaning  of  such  massive  tombs  may  have  been  to  preserve 
the  body  for  resurrection. — The  Bible  never  taught  it, 
though  allusions  may  be  claimed  for  it. 

Moses  and  the  Two  Auks. 

But  the  most  beautiful  instance  of  fidelity  to  the  living 
and  the  dead  we  find  in  Exodus  13,  19 :  "And  Moses  took 
the  bones  of  Joseph  with  himself  (to  bring  them  into  the 
Promised  Land),  for  Joseph  had  earnestly  enjoined  upon 
the  Israelites,  'When  God  will  remember  you,  then  take 
my  bones  with  you  hence.' " — Thus,  when  Moses  had 
matured  his  scheme  of  redemption,  when  he  had  vanquished 
the  numerous  obstacles  on  his  way,  those  of  the  despotic 
Pharaohs  and  of  the  inert  Ebrew  masses,  then,  in  the 
moment  of  departure  and  of  liberation,  what  occupied  his 
attention  in  that  crisis?  The  care  for  the  ashes  of  the 
patriarch! — What  a  noble  piety  for  the  dead!  Again, 
Joseph,  the  juvenile  shepherd,  sold  into  slavery,  a  captive  in 


MOSES   AND   THE   TWO    ARKS.  197 

Egypt,  and  there  becoming  tlie  viceroy,  wlien  dying,  at  the 
foot  of  the  throne,  prayed  his  brethren— those  who  had 
wronged  him  so  much— "God  will  remember  you;  you  will 
return  home,  then  take  my  bones  with  you,  that  my  ashes 
may  mingle  with  yours."— What  a  noble  piety  for  the 
living ! 

Think!  Joseph,  the  Egyptian  prince,  prefers  a  humble 
mound  near  his  kinsmen  to  the  proud  mausoleum  of  the 
Egyptian  Pharaohs.  Centuries  later,  Moses,  starting  a  new 
nation,  a  new  era,  fulfills  that  wish.  The  sarcophagus  of 
the  dead  patriarch  had  been  buried  under  a  stream,  turned 
away  for  that  purpose.  Legend  claims  that,  at  the  voice  of 
Moses,  the  sarcophagus  arose  and  came  swimming  across  the 
waves  to  share  in  the  redemption  and  return  from  exile  to 
the  ancestral  home.  Legend  and  history  both,  what  fine 
ideals  of  fidelity  to  the  living  and  the  dead! 

In  classic  times  it  was  customary  (says  Dr.  Yellinek), 
when  a  general  returned  victorious  from  his  campaign,  to 
receive  the  honors  of  a  triumph.  Gorgeously  clothed  with 
the  imperial  purple,  a  rich,  golden  wreath  around  his  brow? 
he  made  his  entrance  in  a  magnificent  chariot,  bands  of 
music  and  numerous  decorated  guards,  the  war -prisoners, 
the  captive,  chained  princes,  the  booty,  following;  the 
people  hilarious  and  shouting,  the  banners  gaily  waving, 
the  names  of  battles  gained,  of  cities  taken,  exhibited  to 
the  admiration  of  the  vociferous  multitude.  Such  was  the 
triumphal  march  of  a  Roman  imperator.  Moses,  having 
conquered  the  successors  of  Raamses,  liberated  his  clansmen, 
and  leading  them  forth  to  independence— what  was  his 
trophy?  what  his  triumphal  pomp?  The  sarcophagus  of 
the  dead  chieftain,  Joseph,  who  wished  his  ashes  to  mingle 
with  those  of  his  posterity  ! 

What  a  noble  example  of  fidelity  to  the  living  and   the 
dead. 


198  SPIRIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

A  legend  claims  that  Moses  was  preceded  on  Ms  marcli  by 
two  arks,  one  containing  Joseph's  remains,  the  other  destined 
as  the  future  ark  of  the  covenant.  And  the  nations  wondering 
at  that,  were  answered :  "  Why,  one  ark  is  containing  the  ashes 
of  the  dead  and  the  other  the  spirit  of  the  Ever-Living ; " 
the  one  representing  the  past,  the  other  the  ever  future ; 
those  ashes  had  been  inspired  by  that  spirit — that  spirit  is 
but  the  unfolding  of  history  past  and  future. 

Seeah  b.  Ashir. 

Who  discovered  the  place  where  Joseph's  sarcophagus  had 
been  buried  under  the  stream  ?  A  legend  tells  that  it  was 
Serah  b.  AsTiir,  a  woman.  She  had  lived  and  waited,  since 
Joseph's  demise  till  the  liberation  by  Moses.  She  pointed 
out  to  the  latter  the  watery  grave  of  the  viceroy.  Thus 
a  woman  was  made  the  symbol  of  hopefulness  to  bridge 
over  and  connect  the  past  bondage  with  the  future  redemp- 
tion! The  Greek  myth  claims  that  Pandora  frivolously 
opened  the  fatal  box  with  the  fatal  locked-in  ills ;  the  ills 
got  out  to  the  ruin  of  man ;  hope  alone,  at  the  bottom  of  the 
box,  remained,  thus  precluded  from  solacing  man.  Thus  the 
Greek  myth  insinuates  woman  as  disappointing  man's 
hopes.  The  Ebrew  legend  makes  woman  the  bearer  of 
solace  and  hope  to  man.  Here  is  another  contra=?t  between 
woman  in  Greek  myth  and  Ebrew  legend.  (^) 

Reader,  am  I  wrong  in  saying  that  Homer  and  Hesiod, 
Virgil,  Edda  and  Mebelungen,  are  eclipsed  by  such  simple 
narratives,  and  such  sweet  legends  as  just  mentioned 
from  Pentateuch  and  Agada  ?  And  wherein  lies  their  charm, 
their  thrill,  their  superiority  ?  Simply  in  their  truthfulness ; 
fact  and  fiction  tave  their  gold  grain  of  truth;  they  mirror 
nature  in  their  crystal  waves.  Both  their  conceptions  and 
their  feelings  are  honest  and  genuine ;  they  touch  us, 
because  they  touch  a  corresponding  chord  in  our  bosoms, 
ever  ready  to  respond  to  what  is  really  great  and  noble. 

(1)    Jalkutbe-Shalah. 


POSITIVE   BENEVOLENCE   AND   POOR   LAWS.  199 

POSITIVE   BENEVOLENCE   AND   POOR-LAWS. 

We  have  discussed,  above,  many  institutions  and  enact- 
ments of  the  Pentateuch,  which  we  may  denominate 
as  negative  benevolence,  laws  that  remove  obstacles 
in  the  way  of  the  needy  to  recuperate  and  rise  in  the 
economic  scale.  Let  us  now  have  a  survey  of  the  positive 
ones.  Those  by  which  they  shall  actively  be  helped  to 
stand  again  upon  their  feet.  (V.  M.  24,  19-22):  "When  thou 
reapest  thy  harvest  and  hast  forgotten  a  sheaf,  do  not  go 
back  to  fetch  it,  but  leave  it  to  the  stranger,  the  fatherless 
and  the  widow." — "  When  thou  beatest  down  thy  olive  tree 
do  not  go  over  the  boughs  again,  but  leave  something  for 
the  stranger,  fatherless  and  widow." — "  When  thou  gatherest 
in  thy  grapes,  do  not  glean  over  again,  but  leave  some,  etc., 
etc.,  that  God  may  bless  thee.  .  .  .  Remember,  a  slave 
and  poor  thou  hast  been  in  Egypt."     .     .     . 

These  divers  gifts  are  by  the  Talmud  denominated  pick- 
ings— leavings — margins  and  gleanings.(^) 

(See  Maimonides — Ta^Z—"  Gifts  to  the  poor,"  I.  1,  and 
Pcah.  I.  2) :  "  Remember,  thou  hast  been  a  bondsman  in 
Egypt;  therefore  do  I  command  thee."  This  is  the  law's 
constant  keynote.  Thus  the  most  helpless  of  mankind  are 
placed  under  the  special  protection  of  the  Deity,  the  king 
of  the  biblical  State.  According  to  III.  M.  19,  9,  the 
products  of  the  margins  of  the  farm  belong  to  the  poor,  too. 
In  the  Release- Year  the  spontaneous  field-growth  belonged 
to  the  same.  (III.  M.  25,  6). — Three  yearly  festivals  are 
instituted,  during  which  the  whole  nation  should,  possibly, 
be  at  the  capital  to  worship  and  unite  in  the  same  national 
bond  and  feel  happy.—"  But,"  adds  the  law,  (V.  M.  16,  11) 
"  thou  shalt  rejoice  with  thy  children,  thy  slave,  the  Levite, 
the  stranger,  the  widow  and  the  orphan."  Thus  the  holi- 
days, too,  were   benefits  for  the  poor.     So  was  especially 

■n'hb'W  ,nND  ,nn3tr  ,^rh   (i) 


200  SPIRIT   OP   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

the  weekly  Sabbath.     Even  in  the  Ghetto,  the  darkest  days 
of  the  Mosaic  people,  this  hospitality  to  the  poor  was  a 
standing  virtue  with  them.     It   was   a   privilege   to   take 
home  a  poor  traveling  guest  for  the  Sabbath. — In  V.  M.  14, 
28,  we  read:     "At  the  end  of  every  third  year  thou  shalt 
collect  the  tenth  of  thy  field-produce  and  leave  it  in  thy 
storehouses,  that  the  poor,  the  Levite,  the  Gentile-immi- 
grant, the  orphan  and  the  widow  shall  eat  and  get  enough — 
that  God  may  bless  thee  in  all  thy  handiwork." — In  V.  M. 
26,    12,  this   law   is   repeated,   preceded   by  another  of   a 
similar    nature,    according  to  which  the  firstlings   of  the 
produce  of    the   land   were    consecrated    to    the    national 
gatherings  in  the  capital,  the  above-named  poor  to  partici- 
pate in.     According  to  tradition  (Bikkurim  III.)  the  people 
met  in  the  leading  places  of  the  districts,  and,  accompanied 
by  music  and  a  wreathed  ox  for  sacrifice,  they  pilgrimed 
to   Jerusalem  and  the  temple  mount,  each  with  his   pro- 
visions and  his  friends.     After  a  solemn  temple  service  and 
a  most  touching  special  prayer,  remembering  the  common 
lot   of   troubled   mankind,  the  feeling  of  national  unison 
and    solidarity,    they    enjoyed    the    humble  feast   in  the 
presence  of  the  Deity,  extending  the  conviviality  to  poor 
and  stranger,   etc.     The  wreathed  ox  in  the  procession  is 
remembered  in   the  "  Mardi    Gras."     These    festivals    are 
frequently  alluded  to  in   S.  Scrpt.,  a  beautiful  trait  inter- 
twining and  fusing  religion,  nation  and  mankind,  body  and 
soul  and  their  solidarity,  as  they  really  are  in  nature. 

It  is  not  easy  to  decide  whether  the  lawgiver  instituted 
for  such  purposes  one-tenth  of  the  crop  or  several  tithes, 
since  they  are  mentioned  several  times. 

Of  course,  critics  have  claimed  to  find  here  different 
hands  and  divers  epochs.  The  Rabbis  try  to  settle  matters 
in  the  following  way:  From  all  field-produce  the  Ebrew 
farmer  had  to  bring  two  from  one  hundred  to  the  priests ; 
next  the  jirst  tenth  to  the  Levites ;  next  a  second  tenth  to 


BIBLICAL    TITHES.  201 

be  consumed  in  Jerusalem  during  tlie  holidays  (V.  M.  14,  23). 
Of  tliis  second  tithe  enery  third  and  sixth  year  the  produce 
was  set  apart  for  the  poor,  etc.  (Maimonides,  Tad,  Poor- 
gifts  and  second  Tithes— Talmud  Peah.  8,  5)  (M.— Nor  must 
we  forget  that  the  Sabbath  is  especially  instituted  for  the 
poor  serving  classes,  as  expressed  with  special  emphasis  in 
the  second  Decalogue,  V.  M.  5,  14.— These  popular  gather- 
ings in  the  capital  during  the  holidays  Maimonides  justly 
thinks  ''to  intend  keeping  alive  the  feeling  of  sociability 
and  fraternity."  (More  Neb.  Ill,  39).  Moreover,  L.  Philipson 
adds  :  "  They  were  to  conform  to  the  mode  of  the  ancients, 
to  unite  religion  and  joy;  whilst  in  modern  times,  people 
are  given  to  either  the  stern  earnestness  of  religion  or  to 
unbridled  sensuality." — I  think,  they  were  intended  as  an 
especial  bond  of  nationality  and  consanguinity,  coupled 
with  the  desire  to  interconnect  life  and  religion,  as  is  the 
case  throughout  Mosaism. 

Biblical  Tithes. 

These  tithes  were  levied  upon  the  produce  of  the  soil, 
and  the  flocks  of  clean  and  unclean  animals.  The  first-born 
son,  too,  had  to  be  redeemed.  The  firstlings  of  animals 
belonged,  too,  to  the  Temple.  The  question  now  arises: 
"Were  not  all  these  taxes  exorbitant,  and  were  they 
really  paid?  "  Some  claim,  they  were  not  paid;  some,  that 
there  was  but  one  and  the  same  tithe,  differently  applied 
in  divers  epochs  and  circumstances.  Yet,  according  to 
Tobias  I,  7,  and  to  Josephus,  (Antiquit.  4,  8  and  8-22),  such 
tithes  were  actually  paid !  Let  us  not  forget  that  the  tribe 
of  Levy  had  no  lands,  and  hence  needed  some  safe  income 
for  subsistence.  Again  we  must  remember  that  these  tithes 
covered  the  expenses  of  State,  church  and  school,  of  temple, 
priests,  Levites,  police,  etc.,  representing  all  of  our  modern 
government,  divine  worship,  public  instruction  and  justice ; — 

.-JK'  "iK'yo  ,jit:'xi  "i:ry»  ,nDnn    (i) 


202  SPIRIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

then  it  would  not  seem  to  be  exorbitant.  Nor  must  we 
forget  that  these  were  not  taxes,  in  our  sense  of  the  term- 
They  were  rather  moral  duties,  ordained  by  law,  the  pay- 
ment of  which  was  left  to  individual  good-will  and  con- 
science. The  Levites  were  always  classed  with  the  poor, 
the  widow,  the  stranger  and  the  orphan ;  that  proves  suffici- 
ently that  the  Levites  and  many  of  the  priests  were  not 
overpaid  for  their  spiritual  services.  Judging  from  differ- 
ent hints  in  MisJina  and  Gemara,  we  feel  justified  in  think- 
ing that  the  farmers  were  believed  not  to  be  overscrupulous 
in  the  payment  of  tithes.  They  were  often  termed  "  ignor- 
amus," '^  idiot,'"  and  naturally  presumed  as  ^^  unclean 
hoors."  (^) 

Biblical   Charity — Unsectarian. 

In  the  above-mentioned  verses  we  find  the  classic  sources 
of  the  so-called  "Jewish  charities,"  the  "Christian  chari- 
ties," the  "Moslem  charities,"  etc.;  all  these  are  but  the 
developments  of  the  Mosaic  teachings  on  benevolence  and 
universal  solidarity.  The  Eabbinical  law,  the  New  Testa- 
ment, the  Koran,  are  but  expounding  and  applying  those 
principles  to  actual  circumstances.  When,  in  later  times, 
the  Jews  had  become  less  an  agricultural  and  more  an 
industrial  and  commercial  people,  especially  those  out  of 
Judffia,  money  was  raised  for  charitable  purposes  called 
Quppa,  charity-box,  wherewith  it  was  prescribed  to  assist 
Ebrew  and  Gentile  poor  indiscriminately;  in  conformity 
with  the  biblical  prescriptions,  where  the  Gentile  stranger 
or  immigrant  was  recommended,  side  by  side  with  the 
native  poor,  the  Levite,  the  orphan,  the  widow,  etc. 

Thus  does  the  Bible  provide  for  the  less-favored  of  for- 
tune, not  by  begging  and  modern  pauper-rates,  but  by  right 
of  sympathy,  human  solidarity  or  national  community  of 
interests;  to  such  an  extent  that  it  became  an  Ebrew  saying : 

•  SOD  /NDi  ,t2V"in  ,pxn  nv   (i) 


RABBINICAL    CHAEITY   AND   NEAV   TESTAMENT.  203 

(Prov.  14,  31) :  "  Who  wrongs  the  poor,  blasphemes  his 
Maker ;  and  who  befriends  him,  worships  God ; "  identical 
with  our  English  expression :  "  Worship  to  God  is  love  to 
man." 

Rabbinical  Charity  and  New  Testament. 

In  Talmud  Shekallm,  V.  6,  we  read  that  the  ancient  tem- 
ple had  a  room  called  "  room  of  the  silent "  (^),  where  those 
needy  persons  were  remembered  that  refused  public  chari- 
ties. Here  we  have  the  parallel  of  the  New  Testament  say- 
ing :  "  In  giving  alms,  let  your  left  hand  not  know  what  the 
right  one  is  doing." — Our  modern  charities  must  be  stimu- 
lated, if  not  provoked,  by  the  public  press.  Closely  seen, 
certain  people  become  philanthropists  solely  as  a  paying 
means  of  advertisement.  Many  things  are  undertaken  osten- 
sibly for  the  public  interest,  really  for  self-glorification. 
Let  it  pass,  if  the  public  at  least  profits  by  it.  The  New 
Testament  is  especially  severe  on  ostentatious  alms-giving, 
denying  it  any  merit  whatever.  It  closely  follows  its  prede- 
cessors. The  prototype  of  such  views  on  the  delicacy  of 
charity  is  found  exactly  so  in  Talmud  Chagiga,  5a:"  Better 
no  charity  than  for  ostentation's  sake. " 

In  Mishna  Tanith  4,  5,  we  read  of  peculiar  and  unique 
festive  days  (the  15th  Ab  and  10th  Tishri),  instituted  for 
matchmaking,  called  the  "  pretty  ones,"  when  the  maidens 
took  the  initiative  in  courting  the  youths.  "  All  of  them 
alike  were  dressed  in  white,  plainly  and  humbly,  in  order 
not  to  shame  the  poor  girls,  and  let  each  of  them  have  their 
good  chances."  (^)  Here  is  the  origin  of  our  leap-year  free 
courtship  and  sociable,  at  least  as  to  the  privilege  of  feminine 
initiative.  As  to  the  magnanimity  of  dressing  plainly  in 
order  not  to  shame  the  humbler  rivals,  I  know  of  no 
instance  in  modern  times.  Competition  now-a-days  seems 
to  be  of  a  hardier  stuff,  even  among  the  gentler  sex. 

.D'N::'n  n2::6    (i) 

.y'r]''^^  3X3   V'tD3  ^X-1L"'!5  D''31t3  D"©'  Vn  N^     (3) 


204  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

Here  is  another  sweet  emanatioii  from  tLe  biblical  soli- 
darity and  charity  laws :— (Peali,  I.,  1).  The  following 
have  no  limits  (^) :  "  The  gifts  to  the  poor  of  the  corner 
growth  of  the  field;  of  the  firstlings  of  the  fruit;  of  festiv- 
ities during  the  national  gatherings  in  Jerusalem ;  free 
benevolence  and  study  or  learning." — To  the  question 
whether  wordly  or  Greek  learning,  too,  is  included,  the 
answers  and  opinions  are  varied,  according  to  the  school 
and  the  epochs  of  the  expounders. 

Thus  we  read  in  Talmud,  Menachoth,  99  & :  "  Ben 
Doma,  nephew  of  R.  Ismael,  inquired  of  the  latter:  'I, 
who  have  learned  the  entire  law,  can  I  study  the  Greek 
science  ? '  The  uncle  quoted  thereat  the  verse :  '  This 
law-book  shall  not  be  removed  from  thy  mouth,  and  thou 
Shalt  ponder  thereover  day  and  night.'  Now  go  and  look 
out  for  an  hour  that  is  neither  day  or  night,  and  learn  the 
Greek  science."  Again  in  other  places  it  is  mentioned 
eulogistically  of  Rabbis,  strong  in  Greek  and  in  science.  So 
it  is  claimed  that  every  member  of  the  great  Sanhedrin 
had  to  know  many  languages,  as  the  examination  of  crimi- 
nals had  to  be  held  without  an  interpreter.  Liberality 
produced  liberality,  and  intolerance  intolerance,  with  Jew 
and  Gentile. 

The  same  Mishna  continues  :  "  These  (^)  are  the  things 
whose  fruit  a  man  enjoys  in  this  world,  whilst  the  principal 
remains  for  the  hereafter,  viz:  Filial  respect  to  parents; 
benefactions  to  the  needy ;  peacemaking ;  whilst  learning 
outweighs  them  all." — It  is  interesting  to  remark  the  high 
esteem  in  which  the  Rabbis  held  learning.  Their  education 
began  with  morality  and  closed  with  mentality.  They  based 
the  latter  upon  the  former.  Mentality  without  morality 
they  likened  to  "a  large  tree  with   huge,  wide-spreading 

•  min  mo^ni  onon  n^'OJi  irt^nm  nma^m  r]iiE:ir[    (i) 


RABBINICAL    CHARITY    AND    NEW    TESTAMENT.  205 

branches  rising  to  the  sky, — but  with  slender  roots  ;  such  a 
tree  tumbles  down  at  the  least  storm." — The  Rabbinical 
moralists  enjoin  on  all  public  occasions  benefactions  to  the 
poor,  as  in  dangers  and  sickness,  at  funerals,  births,  wed- 
dings, etc. 

And  whilst  they  so  much  and  so  often  enjoin  to  give, 
they  at  the  same  time  enjoin  the  needy  to  refuse  public 
assistance  as  long  as  possible.  Only  actual  starvation 
allows  that;  only  in  extreme  cases  alms  were  acceptable. 
Here  are  some  Talmudical  proverbs  to  that  effect :  "  Skin 
a  carcass  in  the  street,  but  ask  for  no  alms.^f ) — "  Who- 
soever neglects  teaching  his  son  a  trade  is  as  much 
guilty  as  if  he  had  raised  him  for  robbery."f)  R.  Simon 
says  :  "  It  is  written,  '  Choose  life.' "  (Deuteronomy,  30). — 
That  means  a  trade. — '*  Work  honors  the  workman."  (^j — 
"  Cherish  work  and  hate  assumed  gentility."  (*)  "  Make 
thy  Sabbath  a  week-day  and  apply  to  nobody  for  help." — 
"  Upon  three  things  stands  the  world :  upon  instruction, 
work — others,  prayer — and  benevolence." — (Aboth,  I). — 
Another  version  thereof  is  :  "  Upon  truth,  justice  and  peace 
stands  the  world."  Many  other  passages  there  enumerate 
the  leading  human  virtues :  For  the  mass  of  the  people  they 
extol  practical  work  as  the  highest  of  virtues.  For  the 
professional  scholar  learning  is  the  highest.  Many  Rabbis 
combined  learning  with  a  humble  trade.(^j  '*  A  scholarly 
bastard  is  above  an  ignorant  high  priest,"  is  a  significant 
Rabbinical  proverb. — All  these  teachings  are  staunch  sup- 
poirters  of  work,  menial  and  mental.  "  For  six  days  shalt  thou 
work,"  was  just  as  sacred  a  commandment  as  the  Sabbath- 
rest.  They  stand  up  for  property,  for  mine  and  thine. 
They  were  no  communists.  They  recognized  the  knight- 
hood of  both  labor  and  knowledge.  They  aspired  to  both 
whenever  possible.     Says  a   teacher  in  the  same  Ahoth : 

(1)    Pesachim,  nSti.        (li)    Kidushin,  39  a.        (3)    Nedarim,  49  b.        (4)    Aboth  I,  9. 
(5)   Aboth  II,  2. 


206  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

"  That  is  tlie  way  of  study." — "  Eat  bread  with  salt;  drink 
water  in  moderate  quantities ;  sleep  on  the  bare  floor  and 
go  on  studying." — "  Well  goes  learning  with  work.  The 
first  alone  will  not  thrive." — "  No  meal,  no  learning.''^ — 
"  There  are  in  the  world  three  crowns :  that  of  learning,  of 
priesthood  and  of  royalty ;  yet  a  good  name  is  the  highest." 
Others  say :  "  Learning  is  the  best." — "  Seek  for  no  other 
honors  than  learning.": — "  Seek  not  for  prince's  favors,  since 
thy  table  is  more  honorable  than  theirs  and  thy  crown  is 
above  theirs,"  etc. 

The  Rabbis  understood  well  the  delicacy  of  charity.  So 
Toreh  Deah  (Charity,  249,)  says :  "■  We  must  give  charity 
with  a  friendly,  smiling  face,  sympathetically  conversing 
with  the  poor  one  and  encouraging  him.  If  you  have  not  to 
give  him,  do  not  speak  harshly,  but  rather  by  kind  words, 
show  him,  anyhow,  your  good-will. — There  are  several 
grades  of  charity,  each  one  higher  than  the  other : 
First  encourage  a  man  who  is  impoverished,  by  a  loan,  a 
partnership,  etc.;  i.  e.,  offer  no  degrading  alms.  Next  give 
charity  without  letting  the  poor  one  know  who  gave  it  to 
him.  Next  give  without  waiting  for  being  asked.  Above 
all,  do  not  speak  and  boast  of  the  charity  bestowed." — 
IMdem,  the  poor  scholar  is  especially  recommended. 
His  work,  his  goods,  etc.,  shall  first  be  considered  by  buyer 
or  employer. 

We  read  in  Hagigah  (5  a)  a  Rabbinical  discussion  con- 
cerning sins  deriving  from  simple,  indelicate,  indiscreet 
dealings.  As  such  are  quoted,  persons  that  "  give  alms  -in 
public,"  for  ''  better  is  not  to  give,  than  give  and  shame 
the  poor ;"  or  to  "give  alms  to  a  poor  woman  secretly,  on 
account  of  the  evil  tongues."  In  Kethuboth,  67  a  and  5,  we 
read :  "A  male  and  female  orphan  in  need,  the  female 
comes  first  to  be  assisted.  When  such  are  to  be  married 
she  is  first  in  order;  he  shall  wait." — We  are  bid  to  assist  the 
poor,  not  to  enrich  them.     Yet  it  is  told  of  Hillel  I.  that 


TALMUDICAL    CHARITY   METHODS.  207 

he  gave  to  sucL  an  effeminate  one  even  a  horse  and  a  slave. 
When  the  poor  refuses  alms,  a  loan  shall  be  given  him. — 
A  Rabbi  used  to  give,  incognito^  a  small  alms  daily ;  once 
upon  a  time  the  poor  detected  him ;  the  Rabbi  ran  away, 
hurting  himself  on  the  occasion — "/"or  'better  is  to  run  into 
a  fiery  furnace  than  shame  a  fellow-manr 

Talmudical  Charity  Methods. 

There  is  no  denying  that  the  Talmud  once  started  in 
assuming  that  the  biblical  word  ^^Guer"  in  connection  with 
gifts  to  the  poor,  originally  denoting  immigrant,  foreigner, 
meant  only  the  "Guer  Zedek,''^  a  proselyte,  a  Gentile  having 
adopted  the  full  Judsean  faith,  trying  to  deduce  this  from  a 
verbal  analogy.  Yet  their  solid  sense  for  truth,  propriety  and 
morality  made  the  Rabbis  soon  abandon  that  position,  and 
declare  that  "  the  heathen  poor  are  not  to  be  deprived  of 
those  gifts,  for  the  sake  of  humanity "  (darkai  Shalom.) 
There  is  not,  etymologically,  a  shadow  of  doubt  that  the 
biblical,  original  sense  of  Guer  is  a  non-Israelite,  an  immi- 
grant stranger,  the  distinction  between  "  Guer  Zedek  "  and 
"  Guer  ShaarP  or  '■'■Thoshal)  "  being  of  later  date  (Maimon- 
ides  Yad — Poor-gifts  I,  9.) 

Beautiful,  indeed,  are  these  teachings.  (Ibid.  VII) :  "It 
is  a  positive  commandment  to  be  charitable  to  the  poor  as 
much  as  we  can.  Whosoever  closes  his  eyes  to  the  destitute, 
transgresses  the  law. — We  must  give  according  to  their 
needs  and  habits — clothing,  dwelling — a  wife,  too." — Mal- 
thus'  misgivings  concerning  '^ o'ver-population^^  never  dis- 
turbed the  minds  of  those  teachers,  whose  maxim  was, 
"  W7to  gives  life,  will  give  hread.^' 

"  If  the  poor  was  bred  up  with  the  habits  of  a  riding- 
horse  and  a  servant  attending  on  him,  he  must  be  provided 
with  them." — A  Rabbinical  hyperbolical  anecdote  narrates 
that  Hillel  I.  having  provided  such  a  fastidious  poor  with 
a  horse,  and  not  being  able  to  give  him  a  servant,  put 


208  SPIEIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

himself  at  Ms  disposal  as  such. — ''  A  fifth  part  of  one's 
income  should  be  spent  in  charities.  Heathen  poor  shall 
be  fed  and  clothed  together  with  Jewish  poor,  for  the  sake  of 
humanity.  Sensitive  poor  refusing  charity,  shall  be  assisted 
in  some  other  honorable  manner.  The  city  authorities  are 
entitled  to  compel  every  one  to  contribute  to  the  public  char- 
ities. The  redemption  of  captives  is  a  special  and  privileged 
duty.  Woman  has  the  privilege  over  man  concerning  food, 
clothing,  marriage  and  ransom  from  captivity.  The  scholar 
has  the  privilege  before  all.  A  learned  bastard  comes 
before  an  ignorant  high  priest." — Ibid.  VIII. 

Maimonides,  following  the  Rabbis,  continues :  "  Every 
Jewish  community  is  bound  to  appoint  a  charity-board,  who 
shall  make  collections  of  money,  eatables^  etc.,  and  distribute 
them  among  the  poor,  the  money-distribution  was  called 
^Quppa,''  and  that  of  eatables  :  'Tlmchui.^ "  Never  have  we 
seen  or  heard  of  a  Ebrew  community  not  having  such  an 
arrangement.  Especially  on  fast-days  such  distributions 
should  be  made ;  a  fast-day  without  charity  is  hypocrisy, 
is  almost  homicide.  The  collections  and  distributions  are 
carefully  to  be  done,  to  prevent  fraud  by  the  busy-bodies, 
etc.  (Ibid.  X) :  "  More  than  any  other  commandment  must 
we  practice  active  charity,  charity  being  the  criterion  of 
the  seed  of  Abraham.  The  import  of  Israel  and  his  faith 
aro  established  solely  by  acts  of  benevolence.  Always  is 
benevolence  bringing  blessings,  for  wJiosoever  Loves,  is  loved, 
whilst  who  is  hard-hearted,  is  of  doubtful  blood  and  origin. 
God  is  love.  The  sages  gave  without  being  known;  they 
first  gave  and  then  prayed.  Whosoever  spends  to  the  poor 
with  an  unfriendly  mien,  even  a  thousand  gold-pieces,  has 
forfeited  all  his  merit.  We  must  give  with  a  kindly,  smil- 
ing, beaming  countenance,  showing  compassion  and  true 
sympathy  by  word  and  deed,  with  the  object  of  our  charity; 
if  you  have  nothing  to  give,  give  kind  words,  anyhow ;  be 
not  harsh  to  him  who  is  heart-broken.     Woe  to  him  who 


HERBERT    SPENCER   ON    PUBLIC    ALMSGIVING.  209 

shames  the  poor! — There  are  different  grades  of  charity. 
The  usual,  dry,  cold  almsgiving  is  the  very  lowest.  The 
highest  is  to  procure  employment,  give  encouragment, 
utilize  the  sinking  man's  capacities  in  a  inarmer  as  to  render 
him  above  anybody's  charities." — ^Here  is  an  outline  of  the 
Talmudical  charity  teachings,  emanations  from  the  biblical 
ones,  models  for  all  civilized  nations,  finding  their  echo  in 
New  Testament  and  Koran.  The  New  Testament  reader, 
especially  will  now  see  whence  derive  those  fine  pithy, 
pointed,  sharp  sayings  of  Jesus  about  true  and  false  charity, 
about  hypocrisy  and  genuine  goodness;  they  come  from 
a  disciple  of  Hillel's  school.  That  treatise  concludes 
(Ibid.  X,  18)  "Ever  shall  a  man  toil  and  bear  everything, 
and  not  throw  himself  upon  people's  charities." — '•  Make  thy 
Sabbath  a  week-day,  and  apply  to  nobody  for  assistance." 
"If  even  a  distinguished  man,  nevertheless,  rather  skin  a 
carcass  in  the  street,  and  say  not :  I  am  a  nobleman  and 
can't  work.  Some  of  the  great  sages  actually  did  cliop 
wood,  draw  water,  work  as  smiths,  etc.,  and  never  asked 
for  charity." 

Herbert  Spencer  on  Public  Almsgiving. 

In  modern  times  economists  and  scientists  have  decid- 
edly pronounced  themselves  against  indiscriminate  public 
charity.  From  Adam  Smith  to  Herbert  Spencer  and  Jolin 
Stuart  Mill,  they  have  declared  poor-laws  and  poor-rates, 
etc.,  as  inadequate,  futile  and  even  hurtful.  Herbert  Spen- 
cer especially,  (^)  is  pretty  near  condemning  it  as  misguided 
and  cheap  philanthropy.  With  pointed  arguments  he  ques- 
tions the  feasibility  and  the  right  of  the  government  to 
interfere  in  such  a  way  on  behalf  of  the  poor.  The  gov- 
ernment's oflS^ce  is,  he  says,  "  To  protect  the  citizen  in  the 
exercise  of  his  rights,  to  shield  him  against  wrong,  not  to 
confer  boons  upon  him  at  the  cost  of  a  fellow-citizen." 

(1).  Social  statics  on  "poor-laws"  and  elsewhere. 
14 


210  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

He  shows  that,  looking  at  the  bottom  of  things,  the  poor 
ha^  been  wronged  somewhere  in  his  struggle  for  existence ; 
that  society  has  somehow  ostracised  him  and  robbed  him 
of  his  chances ;  that  the  government  ought  there  to  step  in 
and  protect  him  and  open  him  the  avenues  of  subsistence, 
not  to  make  him  a  pauper,  not  to  give  him  poor-rates  and 
petty  endowments,  which  may,  at  best,  save  him  from 
starvation,  but  chain  him  down  to  the  galley-bench  of  the 
.proletariat.  He  shows,  for  instance,  that  the  appropriation 
of  the  soil  by  a  minority  to  the  exclusion  of  all  rests  upon 
a  very  doubtful  title.  With  Karl  Marx  and  others,  he 
points  to  the  fact  "  that  property  in  lands  originally  rests 
upon  violence,  cunning,  fraud,  force  and  prerogative;  that 
its  title-deeds  are  written  by  the  sword,  with  blood,  and 
paid  with  blows." 

He  claims  *'  that  such  title-deeds  can  never  confer  legiti- 
mate ownership,  however  many  hands  have  changed  and 
however  much  time  has  elapsed  since."  .  .  .  "There  is 
the  source  of  wrong,  and  many  more  social  wrongs  may 
have  been  committed  against  the  poor  in  the  struggle  for 
existence.  Here  is  the  place  for  the  government  to  inter- 
fere, and  to  see  that  one  person  should  not  accapparate  all, 
and  ten  to  live  on  sufferance."  So  poor-laws  and  rates  are 
now  almost  universally  condemned  as  a  burden  to  the  tax- 
payers, and  useless,  yea, '  dangerous,  to  the  beneficiaries. 
That  criticism  refers  especially  to  alms-giving  and  indiscrim- 
inate charities,  as  practiced  whilom  at  the  doors  of  abbeys 
and  mosques  and  old-time  synagogues.  Again,  such  indis- 
criminate alms-giving,  considered  from  another  standpoint, 
is  the  outcome  of  heedless  philanthropists,  and  doubtful 
pietists;  for  such  poor-laws  rather  breed  than  diminish  pau- 
perism. They  are  a  heavy  burden  upon,  and  an  unjust  taxation 
of,  the  honest  worker,  a  premium  for  laziness,  vice  and 
improvidence.  They  take  away  the  well-earned  comforts 
of  the  first  and  bestow  them  upon  the  latter,  as  if  to  foster 


liERBERT    SPENCER   OX    PUBLIC    ALMSGIVIXG.  211 

and  indulge  them.  They  often  rob  the  producing  honest  to 
feed  the  dishonest  drones ;  being  thus  an  actual  premium 
for  laziness  and  vice,  they  propagate  and  breed  vicious 
drones  and  criminals,  and  stint  the  growth  of  honest,  labor- 
ing families.  .  .  .  How,  then,  treat  that  class  of  people  ? 
The  answer  to  that  is  :  "  Well,  do  not  actually  drown  them, 
but  do  for  them  as  little  as  possible;  do  not  let  them 
starve,  but,  anyhow,  keep  them  from  breeding.  For  pauper- 
ism is  hereditary,  just  as  any  other  vice  is." — This  is  Herbert 
Spencer's  idea  concerning  governmental  and  public  charity; 
and  that  of  most  of  modern,  economic  thinkers.  Indeed,  who 
is  not  aware  of  the  many  abuses  and  drawbacks  of  many 
charity  institutions !  How  often  are  not  the  most  heartless 
and  worthless  hypocrites  at  their  head,  as  if  to  cover  their 
own  ill-gotten  wealth  by  the  veil  of  public  sympathy !  I 
know  many  men  and  women,  thrilling  with  true  philan- 
thropy, occupied  with  public  benevolence.  But  I  know, 
too,  others,  wolves  in  sheep-skins,  using  it  as  hypocrisy's 
cloak. 

But  we  must  not  "turn  out  the  baby  with  the  bath."  We 
must  not  confound  and  condemn  the  two  sorts  of  persons, 
nor  the  two  kinds  of  charities,  nor  -pyit  pretense  alongside 
of  genuine  goodness.  Hypocrisy  is  a  parasite,  fastening 
itself  just  upon  the  noblest  and  holiest.  Indeed,  what 
sacred  things  have  not  been  desecrated  and  profaned  by 
such  Tartiiffes\  Even  so  the  English  poor-laws  may  be 
laws  poor  indeed,  and  Herbert  Spencer  may  be  right  in  liis 
strictures  upon  them.  No  doubt  indiscriminate  alms-giving, 
as  practiced  in  the  Middle  Ages  at  the  abbeys  and  churches, 
or  in  the  Orient  in  mosque  and  synagogue,  or  even  to-day 
in  certain  quarters,  may  be  an  abuse — may  rather  foster 
pauperism  and  vice  than  diminish  it,  an  opportunity  for 
pretense,  rather  than  philanthropy. 

But  there  is,  too,  another  kind  of  benevolence,  a  benevo- 
lence which  is  but  justice  masked.  Let  us  look  to  that 
other  kind  and  its  criteria. 


212  spirit  of  the  biblical  legislation. 

Mosaic  Solidarity. 

The  benevolent  and  solidary  laws  of  Mosaism  are  of  that 
kind.  They  are  not  degrading ;  they  are  not  begging  oppor- 
tunities ;  not  easy  alms-giving  and  alms-taking,  requiring 
no  effort  from  the  rich,  and  from  the  poor  none  except 
cringing  or  showing  a  contrived,  "  crooked  arm,"  or  a  stolen 
"  shivering  baby."  Those  laws  were  simply  reservations  of 
the  State,  held  in  store  for  the  less  endowed.  As  we  have 
in  modern  times  ^'commons,"  or  large  lawns,  grounds,  tracts 
of  land  and  parks,  belonging  to  all  the  citizens,  as  common 
property,  which  the  State  reserves  for  and  utilizes  on  extra 
occasions,  even  so  did  the  Pentateuch  make  its  reservations. 
The  Sabbath-rest,  the  seven  yearly  festivals,  the  Year  of 
Release  and  Jubilee-restitution,  the  corners  of  the  field,  the 
forgotten  sheaf,  the  gleanings,  the  firstlings,  the  tithes,  the 
holiday-gifts,  etc.,  were  such  reservations  for  the  poor,  the 
scholar,  the  stranger,  the  widow,  the  orphan,  etc.  They 
were  reserved  in  right,  not  as  an  alms,  not  degrading  the 
needy,  but  uplifting  them,  giving  them  a  backing  in  extreme 
cases,  placing  them  under  the  especial  protection  of  God, 
the  king  and  proprietor  of  the  State,  not  depriving  them 
of  any  of  the  rights  of  men  or  of  citizens,  leaving  them  all 
the  chances  and  room  to  recuperate  and  reconquer  an 
economical  independence.  Whilst  the  English  poor-laws, 
poor-rates,  poor-rents,  poor-workhouses,  poor-gifts,  etc.,  used 
to  give  the  destitute  but  a  poor  resource — a  dog-kennel,  with 
a  bone  and  a  rag,  bedding  them  upon  vice  and  filth  and  con- 
tempt, beyond  the  means  of  resurrection,  considering  them 
as  pariahs,  lepers  and  outcasts,  the  Bible  treats  them  as 
"brothers  "  in  momentary  difficulties  and  reserves  for  them 
rights  and  sympathies,  not  alms  and  contempt.  Why  this? 
Because  the  political  and  social  fabric  of  the  Bible  is  based, 
not  upon  property,  or  conquest,  or  birth,  but  upon  solidarity; 
upon  liberty,  equality,  equal  economic  chances  and  com- 


MOSAIC   SOLIDARITY. 


213 


munity    of    interests;  because    of    the    principle    of    one 
humanity,  "  children  of  one  God."  Q) 

Indeed,  never  was  a  lawgiver  so  free  in  his  legal  promul- 
gations as  the  Mosaic  one.     He  led  his  people  out  of  Egypt 
under  the  guidance  of  God,  all  alike,  unf ree  and  poor ;  he 
gave  them  a  country,  conquered  by  God,  the  sole  king  of . 
the  State. 

He  portioned  out  among  them  that  territory,  dividing  it 
into  equal  shares,  and  declared  them  all  free  and  equal;  he 
did  that  upon  his  own  terms,  emanating  from  a  superior 
source.  "  Mine  are  the  Israelites,  my  servants,  redeemed 
from  Egypt."  "  Mine  is  the  land,  ye  shall  not  sell  it  for- 
ever." Person  and  soil  were  thus  declared  inalienably  free. 
This  being  the  case,  he  could  prescribe  the  one  God-worship, 
the  Sabbath-rest,  the  Septennate  and  Jubilee,  the  Release 
from  debts,  the  leaving  of  parts  of  the  crops,  of  the  flocks, 
the  tithes,  etc.,  to  the  Levites,  the  poor,  the  stranger,  the 
widow  and  orphan.  Never  was  a  lawgiver  so  untrammeled 
and  original ;  not  Mann,  Lycurgus  or  Solon,  Buddha,  Zoro- 
aster or  Rome's  Decemviri  and  their  Twelve  Tables;  nor  any 
of  the  modern  leaders.— Hence  the  originality,  the  impar- 
tiality, the  universal  justice  of  the  Bible  legislation.  Nor 
was  there  any  injustice  resulting  therefrom,  not  even  in  the 
course  of  long  centuries  of  Judaean  occupation;  no  injustice 
to  the  occupants,  nor  degradation  to  the  beneficiaries,  for 
these  benefactions  were  from  the  start  granted  as  rights, 
not  as  gifts  and  alms.  For  the  thrifty,  the  intelligent 
and  lucky  always  profit  by  the  stupid,  the  lazy  and  the 
wasteful  ones;  they  get  their  own  share  and  moreover, 
that  of  the  luckless  ones.  Hence  it  is  but  fair  to  let  them 
give  a  pittance  of  their  own  superfluity,  arising  out  of  the 
missed  share  of  the  luckless.  It  is  a  kind  of  "ransom  to 
the  poor,"  as  Mr.  Cliamberlain  says.  Or  better  as  the  Bible 
puts  it,  ''that  thy  hrotJier  shall  live  with  thee;'"  an  admir- 

.Q3'n^X  ni.T^  DHN  D'J3     (1) 


214  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

able  phrase,  seldom  met  with  in  modern  poor-laws.  Thus, 
the  Bible  considers  them,  and  the  New  Testament,  with 
a  special,  thrilling  sympathy  and  warmth,  as  brothers  and 
fellow-citizens,  and  does  all  it  can  to  rescue  them  from 
pauperism,  and  help  them  to  a  competency.  All  in  all,  the 
Mosaic  poor  benefactions,  State-school — and  temple — con- 
tributions may  have  amounted  to  some  twenty  per  cent,  of 
the  national  produce;  a  pretty  fair  share  it  was.  But  the 
ancients  wasted  less  in  silks  and  in  cards,  and  in  wines  and 
cigars ;  hence  they  bore  it  patiently. 

Eetrospect  on  State  Charity. 

We  started  from  the  proposition  that  the  Biblical  State 
and  Society  are  built  upon  four  cardinal  principles :  Personal 
liberty,  social  equality,  equal  distribution  of  the  national 
wealth,  and,  lastly,  solidarity  or  community  of  interests; 
hence  mutual  assistance  as  a  right,  not  an  ideal.  As  a 
branch  of  this  last-named,  we  considered  the  Mosaic  laws 
on  benevolence.  We  have  compared  them  with  the  English 
poor-laws,  the  most  elaborate  of  Europe,  beginning  with 
Elizabeth,  in  1563,  and  developing  steadily  and  continually 
to  this  very  present.  We  have  seen  the  scathing  criticism 
of  Herbert  Spencer,  Huxley,  etc.,  upon  these  latter,  claiming 
that  they  are  rather  means  for  propagating  pauperism  than 
alleviating  it ;  that  England  has  probably  the  largest  and 
most  helpless  pauper-class  in  the  world — nearly  a  million 
of  English-born  subjects — and  that  emigration  is  their  only 
means  of  escape ;  that  in  spite  of  poor-rights  and  poor-rates, 
and  colonies  and  work-houses  and  endowments,  etc.,  they 
are  kept  down  and  riveted  to  pauperism,  as  with  an  iron 
grip,  by  social  ostracism,  disfranchisement  and  contempt — 
kept  from  starvation  for  eternal  degradation.  Quite  other- 
wise the  Bible.  It  begins  with  the  ideal  of  "  Ye  shall  be 
unto  Me  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation,"  i.  e.,  all 
alike  and  of  the  same  caste — all  educated;  no  mob.     "To 


RETROSPECT    ON    STATE    CHARITY.  215 

Me  is  Israel  subject." — "To  Me  is  the  soil  subject."     God 
alone  is  King;   all  persons  are   free,   equal,  obeying   the 
same  laws  and  enjoying  the  same  rights.    The  soil  is  equally 
divided  out,  and  inalienable.     There  is  but  little  of  high 
industry,  little  of  high  internal  commerce ;  all  subsist  upon 
the  produce  of  the  original  family-lot.    Hence,  equal  distri- 
bution of  the  national  wealth.     No  proletarians,  no  paupers 
and  no  nobles.     The  poor  are  protected,  encouraged,  helped 
up  to  rise  again.     Can  we  detect  in  that  system  any  kind 
of  communism?     No.     It   consecrates   property,  work  and 
profit,  individuality,  emulation  and  effort.     It  rewards  the 
virtues  and  talents,  and  punishes  vice,  laziness  and  improvi- 
dence.    Thus,   the   Bible   contains   the   best    of    scientific 
socialism.     The  State  superintends,  directs  and  prescribes 
all — "God  is  King;"    laws   govern;    the   State   originally 
owned  all ;  to  that  reverts  all.     The  citizen  is  but  the  free- 
holder— the  tenant  of  the  soil.     Every  seventh  year,  and 
especially  the  fiftieth,  there  is  a  readjustment  of  persons 
and  property ;  a  return  to  the  original  conditions ;  universal 
equality  in  rights,  duties  and  wealth.    The  law  intentionally 
discourages  internal  high  commerce  and  external,  unjust 
wars.     It  is  moderating  and  curbing  cruel  competition  ;  it 
tries  to  keep  every   citizen   on   a    par   with   his   neighbor. 
Thus  it  establishes  the  solidarity  principle,  or  community 
of  interests.     For  him  crushed  in  the  battle  of  existence, 
it   provides,   first,   by  negative   protection.     He  cannot  be 
enslaved;  his  acre  can't  be  alienated;  he  can't  be  crushed 
by  debts ;  nor  by  usury ;  nor  his  bread  endeared   by  rings 
or  monopoly;  nor  can  he  be  ground  down  by  overwork; 
nor  mutilated ;  nor  harshly  treated.     He  is  in  every  respect 
a  citizen,  with   special  care  protected  by  the  State;  he  is 
"  a  brother.''     "  Let  thy  brother  live  with  thee,"  is  a  leading 
maxim. — Next  comes  a  group  of  laws  of  positive  benevo- 
lence, of  active  assistance  in  his  behalf,  as  loans,  portions 
from  harvest  and  flocks,  exemption  laws,  punctual  payment 


'-^16  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

of  wai§fes,  Sabbath  and  holiday  boons,  tithes  and  g-if  ts  on  all 
'solejnn  occasions. — Withal,  he  has  not  lost  caste,  he  is  not 
disfranchised,  not  dishonored;  all  avenues  are  open  to  him> 
to  rise  again  and  become  an  independent  member  of  society. 
Thus    whilst   the   ancient   State   generally   consisted  of 
rulers,  ruled  and  slaves ;  the  Mediaeval  State  of  rulers,  ruled 
and  serfs  or  conquered;  the  modern  one  of  wealthy,  well- 
to-do,  proletarians  and  paupers;  the  Biblical   Society  was 
unique  in  having  but  one  class,  but  one  mass  of  citizens,  all 
alike  by  law  and  fact,  legally,  socially  and  economically 
equal ;  no  aristocrats,  no  plebeians,  no  proletarians  and  no 
paupers.     As  to  the  accidentally  impoverished  individuals, 
the  law  looked  intently  to  it  that  they  should  not  become  a 
pauper  class ;  by  provisions,  nei^ative  and  positive,  which 
gave  them  all  the  necessary  means  and  deprived  them  of 
no  means  to   rise   again  and  become  self-sustaining,  inde- 
pendent   individuals,   just  as    the    rest    of    their    fellow- 
citizens.     Thus  the  Biblical  State  put  forward   a  scheme, 
which  granted  to  each   and  all  of  its  members   all  their 
natural  chances  in  the  struggle  for  existence;  granting  no 
privileges  to  some  and  allowing  no  drawbacks   to   others. 
This  the  Biblical  State  did,  without  recurring  to  any  of  the 
far-fetched,  unnatural,  yea,  impossible    means   of   ancient 
Sparta  or  of  modern  communism.     It  consecrated  family, 
inheritance,  property,   individual    effort    and    emolument; 
generous  emulation,  thrift,  economy,  etc.     Yet  it  chained 
down  fierce  and  soulless  competition,  and  left  full  scope  for 
altruism    by    constantly  appealing  to  man's  moral  sense. 
"  That  thy  'brother  may  live  with  tliee'^  including  all  races, 
creeds  and  tongues  in  the  term  "  thy  brother. ^^ 

Divine  Legislation. 

These  are  the  Mosaic  solidarity  laws,  so  vastly  different 
from  modern  poor-laws;  they  are  elevating  and  human- 
izing ;  not  pauperizing  and  degrading ;  calculated  for  the 


CHURCH    AND    STATE.  217 

class.es  and  masses,  impartial  to  strong  or  weak — to  all. 
And  this  universally  is  the  grand  criterion,  the  touch-stone 
of  a  truly  divine  legislation  ;  a  legislation  made  to  create  a 
great  nation,  and  through  that  nation  to  spiritualize  and 
ennoble  mankind.  This  democracy  and  this  sanctification  of 
the  law  is  the  real  and  secret  principle  which  makes  out 
the  strength  of  the  Bible  and  renders  it  invulnerable  to  the 
tooth  of  time,  the  havoc  of  conquerors  and  the  prejudice  of 
the  vulgar.  The  Bible  system  is  a  theocracy,  but  in  the 
noblest  sense  of  the  term.  It  never  became  a  hierarchy. 
Priestcraft  was  always  put  down.  State  and  Church  there 
are  one.  So  they  are  in  nature;  so  they  are  in  body 
and  soul ;  for  good  use,  not  abuse.  Egypt  and  India,  too, 
were  theocracies,  but  hierarchies,  and  full  of  abuse.  The 
Mosaic  form,  surely,  is  calculated  for  a  certain  epoch  and 
people,  in  a  special  land  under  given  cin'umstances.  But 
the  spirit  of  Mosaism  is  universal  and  boundless  ;  no  clouds 
of  sect,  race  or  countrj^  obscure  its  vision.  It  is  for  all 
times  and  circumstances,  and  hence  divine.  It  is  calculated 
to  slowly  gain  over  mankind  and  make  all  man  one  large 
'brotherhood.  Israel  is  intended  there  as  mankind  in  minia- 
ture, and  mankind  considered  as  Israel  in  extenso. 

Church  and  State. 

Chur<5h  and  State  are  simply  identical  in  the  Bible.  So 
they  are  in  nature.  In  our  text-books  and  in  their  practical 
administration  they  are  divided,  but  in  fact,  they  are  one ; 
one  thing  looked  upon  from  different  standpoints,  as  the 
one  ray  of  the  sunlight,  broken  by  the  prisma  inti^  many 
colors.  Both  aim  at  right  living.  What  we  believe,  we 
must  realize,  or  our  faith  is  hypocrisy.  The  creed  is  the 
theory,  life  is  the  practice,  the  necessary  outcome  of  the 
first,  just  as  the  fruit  is  of  the  root.  If  not,  there  is  pre- 
tense and  sham.  Hence,  the  indissoluble  interfusion  of 
Church   and   State   in    that   system.     In  our   times,  where 


218 


SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 


often  Cliurcli  means  dogma  and  ceremony,  mostly  artifi- 
cially taken  up  from  tradition,  whilst  there  are  many  such 
Churches  and  various  dogmas,  ceremonies  and  traditions, 
which  but  little  influence  actual  life,  we  feel  their  burden 
and  try  to  lighten  it  by  clamoring  for  separation  of  Church 
and  State,  to  avoid  spiritual  or  political  despotism.  Not  so 
at  the  formation  of  religions;  life  and  principle  there  are 
intertwined ;  they  belong  to  each  other,  and  as  little 
separable  as  body  from  soul.  They  are  simply  the  two 
poles  of  the  same  being.  This  is  the  Mosaic  theocracy. 
God  rules,  and  His  just  laws  are  the  rules  of  the  State 
government.  The  human  rulers  were  but  the  spokesmen. 
The  Mosaic,  or  Abrahamic,  religion  was  originally  most 
simple  and  rational.  God,  the  creator  of  all,  was  sole  and 
absolute  authority.  To  Him  alone  belonged  worship.  Wor- 
ship was :  actual,  virtuous,  humane  life ;  the  realization  of 
the  commandments  of  justice  tempered  by  charity. 

Sacrificial   Seevcce  and  Ceremonies. 

Slowly  the  temple-worship  was  elaborated,  supplemented 
and  adjusted  from  materials  extant  and  believed  in  by  the 
generality  of  mankind.  But  they  were  closely  examined, 
sifted,  selected  and  adapted  from  what  would  the  least  con- 
flict with  the  original  Jaliveh  worship.  The  masses  could 
not  and  cannot  grasp  abstract  ideas  and  principles.  The 
Jahveh  religion  was  too  sublime  for  them.  Hence,  were 
added  thereto  necessary  and  adequate  forms  and  observ- 
ances. Slowly  many  more  forms  accrued,  mostly  from  the 
general  stock  extant  at  those  times,  and  consecrated  by 
venerable  ages  past ;  forms  to  keep  alive  the  sense  of  his- 
tory and  nationality;  as  the  holidays,  the  gatherings  in 
the  capital,  etc.,  or  to  nurture  the  sense  of  nationality  and 
country,  as  the  one  capital  and  the  unique  temple ;  or  the 
sense  of  solidarity  and  community  of  interests ;  as  the 
tithes,  poor-gifts  and  national  banquets,  etc.;  or  to  give  an 


homer's  gods.  219 

external  expression  to  the  recognition  of  our  sinfulness,  of 
duty,  of  obedience  to  God  and  his  laws;  as  sacrifices,  the 
universal  mode  of  worship  in  ancient  times  ;  that  mode — 
sacrifices — came  down,  no  doubt,  from  pre-historic,  barbar- 
ous times,  when  God  was  but  the  ancestral  ghost  or  an 
idealized  fetich.  But  that  crude  notion  had  been  obliterated 
and  more  refined  ideas  evolved,  not  only  with  the  Jews,  but 
even  with  the  Egyptian  and  the  Asiatic  priesthoods,  at 
least  in  their  select  mysteries,  where  the  Deity  was  nearly 
as  nobly  thought  of  and  taught  as  in  the  Bible. 

Homer's  Gods. 

The  sacrificial  service,  the  least  congenial,  of  all  modes 
of  worship,  to  the  modern  mind,  was  then  not  so  repugnant. 
In  the  Bible  it  was  so  refined  and  purified  as  to  represent  the 
idea  of  expiation,  or  the  eradication  of  sin,  discarding  the 
notion  that  the  Deity  were  dependent  on  man  for  food, 
drink,  smell,  etc.  Compare,  for  instance,  the  Homeric  and 
the  biblic  systems  concerning  the  sacrificial  service,  both 
composed  at  about  the  same  time, — and  you  will  find  an 
immense  advance  in  the  latter.  In  Hesiod  and  Homer  the 
gods  are  really  in  need  of  food,  drink  and  luxuries  ;  likewise 
they  need  habitation,  sleep,  sport  and  eulogies.  Man  offers 
them  their  wants,  under  the  express  condition  that  they 
should  grant  him  favors,  protection,  victory;  not  even 
shrinking  from  asking  miracles  of  them.  The  gods,  besides, 
are  above  all  the  rules  of  either  reason  or  morality.  Even 
the  great  Zeus  himself,  sometimes  described  nearly  as 
sublimely  as  Jahveh,  often  acts  as  a  paltry  tyrant,  being 
moved  in  different  directions,  as  a  puppet  by  strings,  or  by 
small  motives  and  personalities,  like  a  petty  potentate  is 
by  his  favorites.  Here  are  a  few  examples  about  the  needs 
and  greeds  of  the  gods. 

We  read  in  Homer's  Odyssey,  I,  59  and  66,  about 
Athene    praying    to    Zeus    in    favor    of    Odysseus    being 


220  SPIRIT    OF   THE   BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

allowed  to  reach  his  home,  concluding  with  :  (^)  "  DoevS  not 
thy  heart  thrill  with  sympathy,  Olympian?  Did  not 
Odysseus  serve  thee  well  and  bring  thee  sacrifices  in  the 
Greek  ships,  in  the  vast  land  of  the  Trojans?  Why,  then, 
art  thou  so  wroth  with  him,  Zeus?"  To  which  Zeus  repliesj 
affirming  that  he  would  never  forget  Odysseus.  .  .  . 
"Who  did  bring  most  of  offerings  to  the  gods?"('^)  So 
again  (IV.  351):  "The  goda  desire 'hecatombs.'''  Ibidem, 
IV.  473,  the  same  is  claimed  for  services  rendered.  (^)  So, 
again  we  read  (Odyssey,  VII.  201) :  (") — "  On  many  occasions 
the  gods  appear  to  us  bodily  as  soon  as  we  offer  fine 
hecatombs ;  they  dine  with  us,  sitting  down  where  we,  too, 
are  sitting.  When  one  of  us,  travelling  alone,  meets  with 
them  on  his  journey,  they  do  not  hide  themselves,  since  we 
are  their  kindred,  just  as  the  cyclops  and  the  wild  gener- 
ations of  the  giants."  In  Odyssey,  VIII,  266,  we  are  treated 
to  a  scandalous  story  among  the  gods,  as  never  reporter  of  a 
sensational  daily  could  offer  better  to  his  scandal-thirsty 
readers,  viz :  "  The  love  of  Ares  and  the  beautiful 
Aphrodite,  when  they  first  met  secretly  in  the  house  of 
Hephaistos.     .     .     .     Many  presents  he  had  given  her,  etc., 

(1).  ....  (yi)Se  vv  ao!  nep 

ivTpi-erai  (ptXov  rjrop,  'OAvfj.TriE.  ov  vv  r'  '0<hi<raevg 

'Apyeluv  Trapa  vijval  j^api^ero  iepa  pei^cjv 

T/OOtf/  £V  eupeiy ;  ri  vv  ol  t6cov  co6vaao,  Zev ;" — Odyss.  I,  59. 
(3).  TTw^-  av  ekeit'  'Odwcr^of  iyo)  ■&ei.om  'Aa-&oifi7jv, 

Of  ...   .   TTept  6'  ipd  ■&eolaii' 

a\'iav(iT(naiv  eJw/ce,"  .  .  .  . — Odyss.  I,  66. 
(3).  aXka  fiaTC  u^eXkeq  ^ii  r'  aXT^Miniv  re  -^Eolaiv 

pi'^ag  tEpa  Ka?'   ....  d(ppa  -ax'tara 

a^  kg  narpid'  iKoin  .  .  .  ." — Odyss.  IV,  478. 
(4.)  a'tEi  yap  to  izdpog  ye  t!^£0<  (paivovrai.  evapyeig 

I'lfilv,  siir'  Ep6u[iEv  ayaKkeLTag  EKaTdfi^ag, 

(Wivm>rai  te  irap'  afi/xi  Ka'&fjfievoi  i/x^a  tvep  >)iielc. 

£1  rf'  apa  Tig  /cat  irovvog  litv  ^hjx^TiJjTaL  odiTi/g, 

ohrc  KaTaKpuTTTovaiv,  ekec  aij)Laiv  kyyh'&Ev  Eifiev, 

iooKEp  'K.'vuXonkg  te  kuI  aypia  <pv?a  Tiyavrui'.*^ — Odyss.  VII,  301. 


homer's   (40DS.  221 

etc.  How,  then,  her  jiery,  lame  husband  caught  them 
together,  in  a  trap,  having  given  out  that  he  was  leaving 
on  a  journey.  .  .  .  His  own  wrath  and  the  immense 
laughter  of  the  gods  finding  the  lovers  entrapped.  That  is 
most  comical — but  speaks  very  badly  of  the  ideas  of  the 
Hellens  about  their  Deity  and  of  their  own  loose  morals  and 
models.  (^)  Of  similar  sensualities  of  the  gods  is  narrated 
there,  XL  240.— Whilst  in  Odyssey  XII,  383,  Apollo  brings 
complaint  to  Zeus  about  Odysseus'  friends  having  killed  his 
oxen,  threatening  that:  "If  they  would  not  give  him  an 
equitable  indemnity  ]ie  might  go  down  to  Hades  and  spend 
his  light  to  the  dead.''  (^) — An  exceedingly  puerile  threat 
from  a  first-class  god. 

Again,  there  we  find  the  loud  disputes  of  Zeus,  Here> 
Aphrodite,  Athene,  etc.,  concerning  Troy.  Everywhere  it 
appears  that  the  vagaries  of  the  Greeks  about  mundane 
government  were  brought  home  to  the  gods. — Nowhere 
do  we  find  there  that  sublime  conception  of  the  Bible 
regarding  the  Deity,  the  holy  God,  who  "takes  no 
bribes  and  favors  no  persons,  needs  no  sacrifices,  dwells 
in  the  sublime  heights  and  looks  down  into  the  hearts 
of  the  meek  and  the  contrite,  pleading  for  the  widow 
and  orphans,  giving  bread  and  raiment  to  the  stranger," 
etc.  The  utterances  of  Homer  and  Hesiod  respecting 
the  gods  show  that  Max  Muller's  views  about  mythology 

(1).        Ai'Tap  6  fopfti^uv  ave^dTJ^ETO  kuTmv  aeUhiv 

afj.il)'  'Apeog  (pMrr/Tog  kvaret^avov  r'  'A(j)po^lTT/g, 

<jf  TO.  TTpora  filyf/aav  kv  'll<l)ai(TToio  dSfioiaiv 

TiO'&py  •    TTO/l/ld  6'  iduKe,  71x"'^  ^'  V'^X'''^'^  '>'"'  t:vvyv 

'Yi^aidToto  avuKTog  ■   .  .  .   . 

"nXiog,  0  a^'  i;v6r/a£  fityaC,ofikvovg  ^/,/ldrtr/ 

o(  (V  ayepovTQ  i?eo(  ttoti  ;^fa>lKo/?arec  rfw  .   .   .   . 

■difki'Tspai  6e  -deal  fzivov  alihl  oIkoi  EKdari/ 

aaf^earog  (V  dp  evupro  yeXug  fiampecai  -diolaiv 

Tfxvo.g  eiaopduai  7roXv(ppovog  "HipacoToio. — Odyss.  VIII,  266  and  320. 
(2).  ft  rff  fiot  ov  rhovai  /?owv  knieiKt'  ifioijSyv, 

i^'oofiai.  slg  'Atdao  Kal  iv  vsKheaai  (fiaecvu. — Odyss.  XII,  382. 


222  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

must  give  way  to  those  of  Herbert  Spencer.  Those  gods 
are  not  idealized  bodies,  stars  or  personified  forces  of  nature. 
No,  they  are  mostly  idealized  and  apotheosized  real  persons? 
patriarchs,  heroes,  sages,  conquerors,  male  and  female,  who 
were  transplanted  to  heaven  and  Olympos  in  pre-historic 
times.  There  they  were  believed  to  talk,  eat  and  live  as 
before,  on  earth.  This  theory  alone  explains  the  fables 
about  them. — They  were  sublimized  men  and  women — an 
apotheosis  later  yet  in  use  among  the  Roman  emperors.  The 
biblical  Deity,  especially  with  the  epoch  of  Moses,  is  almost 
invariably  delineated  with  all  the  sublimity  and  purity 
asked  even  now  by  a  fastidious  metaphysician.  Once  or 
twice  only  a  phrase  still  reminds  us  yet  of  the  ancient 
cruder  conceptions  of  the  divine  essence.  (See  the  verses  in 
Exodus  XXIV,  10-11.)  C)  Generally  the  sublimity  and 
spirituality  of  the  Deity  is  maintained  in  S.  Writ. 

The  Pentateuch  and  Theological  Crimes. 

Remark,  again,  with  all  the  rigor  of  the  Bible  against 
idolatry,  the  theological  crimes  and  transgressions  there  are 
very  limited.  At  certain  observances  of  great  historic  and 
national  bearing,  the  law  pronounces  a  curse  upon  the 
transgressor  thereof — "His  soul  shall  be  cut  away  from 
among  his  people." — But  the  Rabbinical  tradition  is  perfectly 
right  in  not  understanding  there  a  judicial  condemnation  to 
be  put  to  death.  Michaelis  (see  his  Mosaische  Gesetzge- 
bung),  not  always  well  acquainted  with  the  inner  spirit  of 
Mosaism,  claims  that  it  means  a  judicial  death-warrant. 
He  is  mistaken.  I  decidedly  believe  that  tradition  here 
has  more  correctly  grasped  the  lawgiver's  sense.  Such 
extermination  is  pronounced,  for  instance,  for  eating  leav- 
ened bread  on  Passover,  the  law  prescribing  unleavened 
bread  as  a  reminiscence  of  the  Exodus.  Michaelis  construes 
this  into  a  death-penalty.     The  Rabbis  think  it  implies  a 

■v^n  nnni  bi^iu"  'nba  ns  isi^i    (i) 


RABBINICAL   EXUBERANCE.  223 

strong  vituperation,  and  they  are  right.  Hence,  about  the 
only  theological  crime  entailing  death  is  idolatry — active 
public  worship  of  Baal,  Astarte,  etc.  And  whosoever  knows 
well  that  worship,  how  even  among  the  refined  Greeks  and 
late  Romans,  it  was  full  of  licentiousness,  cruelty,  murder 
and  superstition,  will  acknowledge  that  the  Mosaic  rigors 
were  here  in  order,  and  that  these  rigors  do  not  constitute  a 
proof  of  sectarian  bigotry.  Monotheism  was  not  theology ; 
no,  it  was  morals,  it  was  the  ethical  and  social  basis  ;  hence 
the  political  foundation  of  Judaea.  .  .  .  We  can,  there- 
fore, abide  by  our  theory  that  the  Bible,  originally,  is 
broadly  tolerant,  humane  and  unsectarian.  A  salient  proof 
of  the  correctness  of  this  view  is  the  fact  that  it  allows  the 
Gentile  immigrant  (Guer  Toshab)  all  the  privileges  of  civil 
citizenship  when  he  does  not  practice  idolatry  and  has 
but  adopted  the  general  moral  law  of  mankind.  (^) 

Rabbinical  Exuberance. 

1  can  not  claim  the  same  for  the  Rabbinical  laws.  There 
we  do  find  a  huge  multiplication  of  forms  and  observances, 
as  also,  ostensibly  stringent  punishments  for  transgressing 
them  (;).  Intolerance  and  sectarianism  can  not  be  denied 
there.  But  upon  the  correct  cognition  of  facts  and  motives 
thereof,  we  can  hardly  condemn  them.  During  the  long 
period  of  Talmudical  jurisprudence,  the  Ebrews  had  no 
country  of  their  own.  They  lived  scattered  in  all  parts  of 
the  globe,  from  Mesopotamia  and  the  Tigris  regions  to  Asia 
and  Africa,  Spain  and  all  the  European  countries.  Immense, 
cruel,  vulgar  superstitions  hovered  over  those  regions ;  whilst 
the  dominant  religions  were  in  some  sense  a  form  of  Juda- 
ism, close  issues  and  varied  patterns  thereof,  yet  not  identi- 
cal therewith.  Christianity  claimed  to  be  a  rejuvenated 
Judaism,  having  adopted  the  one  God-belief,  the  Decalogue, 

^"1  nivD  y3B'   (1) 
■rwrsn  ni3D  ,nip^r3   (3) 


224  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

the  prophetic  morality,  etc.  But  in  fact,  as  the  Gentile 
races  had  but  lately  emerged  from  crude  polytheism,  they 
had  brought  over  into  new  Christianity  a  great  deal  of 
practices,  phrases  and  even  dogmatic  symbols  that  nearly 
obscured  the  noble  Monotheism  of  the  Bible,  with  its 
rationality  and  luminous  morality ;  even  the  status  of  man 
was  obscured  by  words  brought  over  from  foreign  systems 
and  theories. — Whilst  in  the  Islam  religion,  the  Biblical 
God-idea  was  fairly  well  kept  up ;  unfortunately  the  pro- 
phetic morality  and  humanity,  etc.,  were  not;  the  universal 
indiscriminate  justice  of  the  Decalogue,  its  moral  purity, 
the  sacredness  of  property,  of  life  and  chastity,  of  word 
and  desires  were  strangely  contrasted  by  the  Arab  polygamy  ^ 
roving  propensities,  conquests,  enslavements  and  conver- 
sions by  the  scimetar.  The  intelligent  observer  will  there- 
fore understand,  that  the  Rabbis  were  excusable  in  not 
recognizing  either  of  those  daughter-religions  as  perfectly 
identical  with  the  Synagogue,  and  that  they  deemed  it  their 
duty  not  to  give  in  and  fuse,  but  to  continue  the  unequal 
contest,  at  any  cost  and  any  price.  But  now  arose  the  ques- 
tion, the  Jews  not  having  an  inch  of  land  as  their  own,  how 
could  they  keep  up  their  identity  in  an  age  where  religious 
toleration  was  simply  unknown?  This  they  answered  by 
counter-sectarianism  and  counter-intolerance.  The  few 
rational,  luminous,  religious  ideas  were  hedged  in  by  a  pro- 
fuse forest  of  forms,  ceremonies  and  observances.  The  Bibli- 
cal Monotheism  and  prophetism,  so  simple  as  hardly  to 
require  any  creed  or  text-book,  were  elaborated  and  built 
out  and  up  into  a  vast,  complicated  and  impenetrable 
religious  system,  with  forms  and  observances  that  first 
counted  by  the  hundreds,  but  soon  by  the  myriads.  They 
are  encompassing  the  orthodox  Israelite  from  morning  to 
eve,  from  the  cradle  to  the  grave,  and  beyond  it,  begin- 
ning with  the  hoary  past  and  reaching  to  the  farthest 
future.      These   myriads   of   forms   and   observances   were 


RABBINICAL    EXUBERANCE.  225 

to  be  the  bulwarks,  fences  and  citadels  of  the  faithful 
and  the  safeguard  of  Monotheism.  They  were  of  such  a 
construction  as  to  form  around  each  individual  a  Chinese 
wall;  to  isolate  him  in  the  very  midst  of  the  Gentile 
world,  each  and  everyone  to  form  a  centre,  a  nucleus,  an 
independent  being,  a  people  and  country  in  miniature. 
In  the  market,  the  Exchange,  the  palace,  he  was  a  unit 
of  the  Gentile  community  he  lived  with.  At  home,  with 
his  family,  his  books,  his  festivals,  his  ceremonies,  his 
worship,  he  was  again  a  Judsean,  an  Ebrew,  an  Oriental, 
living  and  dreaming  in  his  old  by-gone  surroundings. 
Rabbinism  is  perhaps  the  unique  historic  example  of  a 
small,  broken,  infinitesimal  minority,  treated  for  centu- 
ries as  outlaws  and  pariahs  that  knew  to  keep  up  the  old 
identity,  patiently  waiting  for  recognition.  Rabbinism 
kept  up  these  claimed-to-be  pariahs  as  a  nobility,  as 
an  aristocracy  of  mind  and  morals,  "as  a  light  to  the 
nations."  It  was  the  first  bold  trial  to  upset  the  usual  laws 
of  majorities  and  those  of  the  crude  times,  and  to  show  for 
once,  that  the  minority,  too,  has  a  right  to  be,  and  that  the 
genius  of  history,  of  God,  often  moves  in  the  minority, 
working  out  by  it  the  salvation  and  the  advance  of  the 
majority.  When  the  Greeks  of  the  time  of  Antioclms 
Epiphanes  challenged  the  -ludseans  to  adopt  Greek  life,  and 
these  refused,  that  was,  no  doubt,  then  thought  foolish  and 
foolhardy.  And,  nevertheless,  the  philosopher  now  admits 
that  it  was  magnanimous.  Why,  then,  should  not  the 
philosopher  now,  perhaps,  admit  the  same  line  of  reason- 
ing?— So,  some  years  ago,  St.  Hilaire,  the  great  Frenchman 
and  writer  of  the  Thiers  government,  declared  that,  "Should 
present  Israel  yield  to  the  onslaught  of  anti-Semitism  and 
give  up  its  biblical  Monotheism,  that  would  be  one  of  the 
greatest  misfortunes  to  mankind  at  large." 

15 


226  spirit  of  the  biblical  legislation. 

Kabbalah. 

For  long  centuries  the  Rabbis  went  on  increasing  the 
ceremonial  and  ritualistic  bulwarks  and  fences,  wliich 
served  the  Jew  as  his  armor  and  coat  of  mail,  to  isolate  and 
strengthen  him,  even  in  the  midst  of  danger  and  tempta- 
tion. At  last  these  observances  began  to  weigh  heavily 
upon  the  votaries.  The  masses  not  knowing  them  as  simple 
armor,  but  as  a  part  of  divine  teachings,  began  to  doubt 
them  as  snch,  and  to  murmur  against  them,  as  heavy  shackles 
in  the  battle  of  li±e.  But  the  Rabbinical  leaders,  aware  that 
that  armor  was  not  yet  superfluous,  contrived  a  new  mode  of 
spiritualizing  and  re-enlivening  those  forms.  It  was  the 
system  of  the  Kdbhalali  that  did  revive  these  myriads  of 
observances.  With  the  advent  of  the  "  Soliar"  this  spirit 
awoke  and  infused  new  life  among  the  mystic  Jews.  It  was 
now  admitted  that  these  forms  would  be  useless  and  even 
burdensome,  if  not  for  their  symbolical  value  and  their  con- 
nection with  the  supernatural  world !  All  the  stars  and  angelic 
hosts  were  believed  to  be  set  in  motion  by  these  apparent 
forms !  They  ceased  to  be  forms,  or  historical,  or  symboli- 
cal remembrances,  and  began  to  be  charms,  mysterious 
powers,  to  dictate  to  the  laws  of  nature,  yes,  even  to  the 
Lord  of  nature  Himself.  The  ^'^Zaddiq,^'  the  mystic  saint, 
took  up  the  Messiah-role  of  ancient  times  and  became 
omnipotent.  But  that  exalted  spiritualism  broke  its  spell  by 
its  own  exaggeration.  When  the  followers  of  Sahhatai  Zem, 
the  Palestinian  Messiah  of  the  seventeenth  century,  boldly 
passed  into  the  Moslem  religion,  and  the  Polish  Frank, 
with  his  followers,  into  some  sort  of  Trinitarianism,  claim- 
ing thus  to  reunite  the  three  religions  into  one  Kabbalistic 
Judseaism,  the  Rabbis  shrank  back  from  that  dangerous 
and  extravagant  mode  of  spiritualizing  the  forms,  and  fell 
back  into  the  enigmatic,  old  and  cold  Talmudic  formal- 
ism, hardly  knowing  where  to  stop ;  until  with  Moses  Men- 


RESUME   OF   THE    FOREGOING.  227 

delssohn,  the  new  school  arose,  coming  back  to  the  study  of 
the  Bible  and  the  origins  of  tradition,  and  began  to  find  their 
way  in  that  labyrinth  of  thirty  centuries,  slowly  discover- 
ing the  luminous  traces  of  original  Sinai,  as  the  religion  for 
Jew  and  Gentile,  for  all  mankind  and  all  times.  The 
Renaissance  of  the  ghetto-Judaeaism  began.  With  that 
Mendelssonian  epoch  opened  a  new  chapter  in  the  history 
and  the  activity  of  Israel.  The  career  of  mysticism  was 
closed;  so  was  that  of  formalism.  And  the  master  minds 
undertook  that  other  task  of  critically  studying  the  Bible  at 
the  torchlight  of  conscience  and  science,  and  to  square  it 
with  the  just  needs  of  the  times. 

Resume  of  the  Foregoing. 

One  glance  more  at  the  chapters  on  "Laws  and  Ordi- 
nances "  (Mishpatim  II,  21,  etc.),  and  we  shall  recognize  the 
universality,  the  divinity  thereof.  "  The  male  citizen  can 
hire  out  for  six  years;  on  the  seventh  year  he  must  go 
free." — "  The  female  citizen  sold  becomes  the  master's  wife, 
or  goes  free." — "  The  heathen  male  slave  must  not  be 
maltreated,  or  he  goes  free." — "  The  heathen,  conquered 
female  slave,  when  cohabited  with,  becomes  the  master's 
wife,  or  goes  out  free.  Ipso  facto,  since  she  was  his  wife, 
hence,  she  can  no  longer  be  his  slave." — "  The  punishment 
for  murder  is  death,  no  difference  whether  native  or 
foreigner,  rich  or  poor,  free-born  or  slave." — "  There  is  no 
pecuniary  compensation,  no  privileged  ranks  nor  refuge 
places  for  murder." — "  From  the  altar  take  him  to  die.  " — 
'*  One  law  is  there  for  native  and  stranger,  Ebrew  and  non- 
Ebrew." — "  Eye  for  eye  and  tooth  for  tooth." — Even  so, 
"  Money  for  money  and  value  for  value." — "  The  thief, 
fraud  and  robber  are  punished  in  purse,  not  in  body." — 
"  The  stranger,  guer,  non-Israelite,  in  Judaea  enjoys  all  the 
protection  of  the  law.  If  permanently  located,  tosJiab,  he 
has  all  the  civic  rights." — "The  poor  stranger,  just  as  the 


228  SPIEIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

orphaiijWidow  and  poor  Israelite,  are  under  the  special  protec- 
tion of  thelaw." — "A  portion  of  the  crops,  the  flocks,  etc.,  is 
reserved  for  them  by  right,  not  as  a  degrading  charity." — 
''Benevolence  is  not  an  ideal  merit,  but  a  duty  prescribed. 
Those  benefited  by  it  are  not  degraded  and  disfranchised ; 
they  continue  as  citizens  and  brothers." — "  The  poor  are  not 
crushed  by  debts,  for  these  lapse  every  seventh  year;  nor  by 
interest  and  usury,  which  are  never  allowed ;  nor  by  rings 
and  monopolies  enhancing  the  price  of  his  bread,  butter, 
meat,  etc.,  for  all  commerce  for  profit's  sake  is  prohibited." 
— ''The  family-lot  goes  down  to  posterity;  it  is  not  alien- 
able; it  is  free  as  the  citizen." — "The  freed  Ebrew  servant 
gets  a  portion  ;  the  freed  Ebrew  girl  an  establishment  or 
dower."  The  entire  fabric  of  the  Biblical  State  is  built 
upon  the  solid  rock  of  personal  liberty  and  social  equality, 
and  these  are  real  and  tangible,  not  simply  de  jure  and 
ideal.  They  are  built  upon  the  original  equality  of  wealth, 
kept  up  by  equal  chances  to  improve,  by  the  safety-valve  of 
Sabbath,  Jubilee  and  the  Release-Year,  the  three  great 
Septennate  institutions. 

The  Jubilee  is  tantamount  to  a  radical  social  renovation ; 
the  Septennate  to  a  partial  one.  Internal  commerce  and 
foreign  wars  are  discouraged.  Thus  all  possibilities  and 
opportunities  for  sudden  unequal  acquisition  or  loss  of 
wealth  and  property  are  reduced  to  a  minimum.  Hence 
plutocracy,  proletariat  and  pauperism  are  nearly  impos- 
sible.— Now,  these  three  pillars  of  the  Bible  State  are 
sustained  by  the  necessary  fourth  one,  solidarity,  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  people  that  they  are  but  one  large  family, 
that  the  welfare  of  each  depends  upon  the  welfare  of  all, 
that  their  interests  are  common,  that  altruism,  not  selfish- 
ness, is  the  sound  social  base,  and  that,  "  love  thy  neighbor 
as  thyself"  is  there  a  fact,  not  an  ideal. 

The  Pentateuchal  legislation  being  universal,  humanita- 
rian, aiming  at  the  elevation  and  the  happiness  of  all,  the 


RETROSPECT CARDINAL    PRINCIPLES.  229 

divine  character  thereof,  as  emanating  from  the  eternal 
wisdom,  the  source  of  truth  and  reality,  is  established.  For 
what  is  good  for  all  classes  and  for  all  times  and  all  cir- 
cumstances can  emanate  but  from  supreme  wisdom  and 
truth ;  from  Him  who  created  all  with  eternal  fitness  and 
inherent  harmony. — Wliatever  is  purely  human,  is  partial, 
temporary,  exceptional ;  all  things  eternally  good  and  just 
are  divine.  And  this  is  the  secret  strength  of  the  biblical 
legislation ;  the  Samson's  hair  of  that  grand  historic  monu- 
ment, old  as  the  pyramids,  young  as  the  United  States ;  a 
legislation  long  since  without  a  special  country,  nation, 
armies  or  defenders. — Yet  it  conquers.  It  conquers  by  its 
inherent  force,  by  the  spirit  of  truth  and  goodness  pervading 
it,  by  the  genius  of  mankind  moving  in  it.  Like  the  famous 
Parthian  hosts  that  conquered  whilst  apparently  fleeing,  so 
is  the  biblical  legislation;  it  conquers  whilst  migrating 
from  country  to  country,  from  continent  to  continent,  every- 
where scattering  the  seed  of  its  divine  truth,  everywhere 
proclaiming :  "  Peace,  peace  to  those  near  by  and  those  far 
away." 

Retrospect — Cardinal  Principles.  • 

We  have  started  with  the  proposition,  in  the  second 
chapter  of  this  work,  that  the  biblical  State  and  community 
rested  upon  four  cardinal  principles,  viz: 

I.  Personal  Freedom. — Every  Israelitish  inhabitant  of 
Judaea,  male,  female,  and  child,  poor  or  rich,  lay  or  priest, 
were  born  and  remained  absolutely  free,  and  could,  under 
no  condition,  be  robbed  of  their  inherent  liberty.  We  have 
seen  that  personal  freedom  is,  thus,  not  of  modern  origin, 
deriving  from  the  speculations  of  J.  J.  Rousseau  and  A.  de 
Voltaire  or  Kant  and  Descartes,  nor  from  modern  Holland 
and  Switzerland,  nor  from  old  Rome  and  Greece.  No  ;  that 
principle  has  been  first  clearly  stated  in  the  Biblical  Legis- 
lation. 


230  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

II.  Social  Equality. — Whilst  not  only  India  and  Egypt, 
but  even  Greece  and  Rome,  had  their  classes  and  masses, 
patricians  and  plebeians;  even  whilst  Germany,  Holland 
and  Switzerland  had  their  different  strata  of  society, 
separated  by  difference  of  rights  and  duties,  an  abyss  not  to 
be  filled  up,  except  by  civil  war  and  blood — Judaea  had  no 
such  castes;  its  citizens  were  absolutely  equal,  partici- 
pating in  all  the  emoluments,  honors  and  burdens  of  the 
State,  capable  of  all  employments,  dignities  and  charges. 

III.  Equal  Distribution  of  Wealth  Among  the  Members  of 
the  Community. — Originally  the  conquered  Canaan  belonged 
to  the  entire  people.  That  land  was  parceled  out  into  equal 
shares  and  then  divided  among  the  grown  male  miembers, 
the  heads  of  families ;  and  that  farm  or  lot  remained  in  the 
family  from  generation  to  generation.  It  could  never  be 
sold  nor  wrested  from  it.  Thus,  every  child  born  in  Judaea 
was  a  free-holder.  No  land-grabbing,  no  great  landlordism 
was  allowed,  and  no  proletariat  possible. 

IV.  Solidarity,  or  Community  of  Interests — Th  e  altruistic 
feeling  as  link  of  the  one  body  politic. — That  bitter  rivalry, 
that  fierce  competition,  that  venomous,  economical  envy, 
the  curse  of  modern  society,  was  not  known  nor  possible  in 
the  Biblical  State.  The  citizens  felt  that,  as  members  of 
the  same  body,  their  interests  were  common ;  that  happi- 
ness and  calamity  is  in  store  for  them  equally  and  con- 
jointly ;  that  the  fate  of  one  is  the  fate  of  all.  Hence  was, 
in  all  critical  cases,  mutual  assistance,  benevolence  and 
active  charity  not  simply  an  ideal,  a  moral  recommendation. 
No,  it  was  a  duty  peremptorily  ordained  by  the  law,  just  as 
paying  one's  debts;  because  all  were  mutually  inter- 
dependent ;  all  interested  in  the  welfare  of  each.  Hence 
was  there  the  modern,  chronic,  inherited  pauperism  impos- 
sible. 

Contrasting  the  Biblical  State  with  the  modern  ones 
concerning  government  and  rulers,  peace  and  war,  conquests, 


RETROSPECT — CARDINAL   PRINCIPLES.  231 

dominant  and  serving  races,  militia,  taxation  and  exploita- 
tion, etc.,  we  have  seen  that  the  principles  of  personal 
liberty  and  social  equality  settled  those  questions  at  once 
and  for  ever.  Once  these  two  principles  admitted  as  funda- 
mental, the  long  and  bitter  civil  strifes  and  quarrels,  internal 
and  international  wars  on  account  of  freedom  and  equality, 
as  in  modern  and  in  ancient  times,  could  not  take  place  in 
the  Mosaic  community.  Had  there  existed  several  such 
communities,  peoples  really  governed  by  the  same  law,  but 
in  different  States,  they  could  not  have  gone  to  international 
war.  The  wars  between  Judsea  and  Samaria  were  constantly 
denounced  by  the  prophets  as  fratricidal,  and  had  at  last  to 
be  stopped.  Nor  could  a  biblical  monarch  or  an  oligarchy 
ever  practice  usurpation  and  tyranny,  the  people  having 
the  right  of  rebellion  as  a  protection.  Hence,  our  last 
century's  revolutions  could  not  have  taken  place  under  a 
biblical  regime ;  nor  could  the  present  European  struggle 
occur. 

Applying  further  the  principles  of  equal  distribution  of 
wealth  and  solidarity  of  interests,  the  present  all  absorbing, 
social  problem  is  likewise  solved  by  the  Bible  legislation. 
Equal  distribution  of  wealth  disposes  of  plutocracy  and  of 
proletariat.  Community  of  interests,  not  soulless  competi- 
tion, not  force  and  taking  advantage;  generous  emulation, 
harmoniously  combined  with  humane,  mutual  assistance; 
sympathy  and  charity  as  a  right  and  duty,  not  an  alms,  a 
degradation,  a  dog-kennel  for  the  poor;  benevolence  to 
eradicate  poverty,  not  the  poor,  to  uplift  and  make  him 
independent;  community  of  interests  at  the  base  of  the 
social  structure  that  disposes  of  pauperism  and  of  prole - 
tarianism.  Thus  equal  distribution  of  national  wealth  and 
the  feeling  of  national  unity  or  solidarity  of  interests  settles 
our  social  problem. 

Now  the  Mosaic  State,  as  the  Platonic  Republic,  has  never 
existed  ;  both  have  remained  ideals. — But  should  it  ever  be 


232  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

a  possibility  of  founding  a  State  and  a  society  on  the  grounds 
of  the  Bible,  there  would  be  no  civil  strifes  and  revolutions, 
no  international  wars,  no  plutocracy^  no  proletariat,  no 
pauperism,  no  aristocrats,  no  mob,  no  masters  and  no  slaves, 
serf  or  wage-labor  or  its  ^^  iron  law  J'  The  social  question 
would  be  settled  in  a  natural,  rational  way. 

It  would  be  settled  without  the  utopia  of  communism 
or  of  exaggerated  socialism.  Property,  individuality  and 
family  would  continue  to  be  sacred.  Personal  effort,  talent, 
genius,  thrift  and  wisdom  would  be  fostered  and  rewarded, 
whilst  vice,  laziness,  wastefulness,  and  imprudence  would 
have  their  due  and  necessary  rebuke.  A  rebuke,  necessary 
not  only  as  a  healthy  encouragement  to  virtue  and  wisdom 
in  general,  but  as  a  stimulant  and  corrective  for  the  vicious 
themselves ;  the  only  remedy  left  them  for  improvement ; 
punishment  being  the  last  salvation  of  the  vicious. 

General  Principles  Reviewed. 

The  principles  of  the  hihlical  legislation  are  first  to  be 
looked  for  in  the  hoary  Sinaic  Ten  Commandments.  The 
base  of  that  entire  legislation  is  the  God  belief.  God  is  the 
Creator  of  the  universe,  the  Redeemer  and  Liberator  of  His 
people.  He  is  the  conqueror  of  Canaan,  the  liege-lord  and 
king  of  the  redeemed,  and  He  is  the  authority  of  that  legis- 
lation. That  theme  runs  through  Pentateuch,  Bible,  Tal- 
mud, New  Testament  and  Koran. 

As  such,  God  consecrated  the  Sabbath  as  the  symbol  of  the 
new  nation.  It  is  the  emancipation  day  of  all  the  enslaved. 
It  is  remembering  the  Ebrew  redemption  from  Egypt.  He 
further  consecrated  filial  piety,  human  life,  chastity,  prop- 
erty, the  sacredness  of  our  word  and  our  feelings.  This 
decalogue  is  the  organic  law  of  the  biblical  State  and  society. 
That  community  is  a  theocratic  democracy.  God  is  king.  His 
law  rules.  The  magistrates  are  but  the  servants ;  the  people 
are  the  aim.     It  is  a  theocracy  ;  it  is  not  a  hierarchy.     Not 


GENERAL    PRINCIPLES    REVIEWED. 


233 


the  priests  reiKn— they  but  apply  and  execute  the  supreme 
law.— They  hold  their  authority  from  the  people  in  whom 
resides  all  authority.  That  authority  is  the  reflex  of  the 
law,  of  eternal  reason.  The  people  are  the  judges  whether 
the  priests  apply  the  genuine  law  of  Qod  or  their  own 
caprice,  and  whether  it  is  correctly  a.ppUed. — Later  crept  in 
royalty ;  but  that  was  half  a  rebellion,  God  alone  being  the 
rightful  sovereign.  The  king  was  at  best  but  the  execu- 
tive officer,  judge  and  general.  He  was  but  a  "brother;" 
he  could  have  no  guards,  no  seraglio,  no  exorbitant  wealth. 
The  Supreme  law  was  ever  binding  upon  him  (Deuteron- 
omy 17,  15).  What  a  vast  difference  between  him  and  an 
Asiatic  or  Egyptian  monarch,  himself  a  god  or  descendant 
of  the  gods,  himself  law -maker  and  yet  above  the  law ! 

The  community  was  a  democracy.  No  born  aristocratic 
classes  and  no  oligarchies ;  rigidly  all  equal  in  social  rank 
and  economic  wealth;  all  alike  educated,  all  free,  equal,  with 
same  laws,  duties,  rights,  chances,  burdens,  charges,  imposts, 
honors  and  emoluments.  The  model  was:  "Ye  shall  be 
unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy  nation."—"  Mine 
are  the  children  of  Israel,  I  have  redeemed  them  from 
Egypt." 

Status  of  land:  "Mine  is  the  land,  ye  shall  not  sell  it 
forever." — Every  citizen  had  a  farm,  detailed  to  him  from 
God's  own  property.  That. acre  descended  to  his  posterity, 
could  never  be  alienated  nor  wrested  from  the  family. 
This  was  the  economic  base  of  liberty  and  equality. 

All  taxation  and  imposts  were  made  by  law.  About  one- 
fifth,  it  appears,  of  the  produce  of  the  soil  and  of  the  flocks, 
the  sole  -Judaean  wealth,  went  to  defray  the  expenses  of 
government,  divine  worship,  public  justice,  schools  and 
sustenance  of  ihe  poor. 

In  the  preceding  chapter  we  have  sufficiently  reviewed 
the  laws  about  freedom  and  slavery.  We  have  seen  that 
the  Ebrew  could  be  hired  out,  but  never  enslaved.     So  was 


234  SPIRIT    OP    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

freedom  inherent  in   every  and  each  man  and  woman  of 
Judaea. 

Every  seventh  year  all  debts  were  cancelled.  Every 
fiftieth  year  man,  soil  and  houses  returned  to  their  original 
families.  Thus  .was  all  social  and  economic  inequality 
remedied. 

Justice  was  freely  and  gratuitously  administered.  Special 
protection  was  given  to  strangers,  widows,  orphans  and  the 
poor. — The  children  suffered  not  for  the  parents'  sins,  nor 
parents  for  the  children's. — Justice  became  less  cruel. 
Excepting  the  Canaanites,  is  toleration  and  forbearance 
enjoined  towards  all,  even  the  Egyptian  and  the  EdomiteSj 
hereditary  foes  of  the  Judaean  people.— The  dead,  too,  have 
their  rights  of  an  honorable  burial  and  a  family  remem- 
brance ;  even  the  criminal  was  protected  from  undue  cruelty. 

Woman  was  the  equal  of  man,  his  helpmeet,  born  in  the 
image  of  God,  "the  mother  of  life,"  to  work  and  toil,  to 
rule  and  enjoy,  as  the  companion  of  man  and  at  his  side, 
as  part  and  parcel  of  man.  She  was  not  a  mischievous 
toy,  a  Circe,  a  Pandora,  to  beguile  and  ruin,  but  to  bless 
and  assist  him. 

War  was  discouraged  and  sufficiently  humanized. — No 
wanton  destruction  of  useful  things.  The  yielding  enemy 
had  his  life  spared.  The  captive  enslaved  was  protected  in 
life  and  limb. — The  captive  woman  could  be  married,  not 
abused,  and  her  issue  was  legitimate.  So  were  children 
anxiously  sheltered  and  under  the  aegis  of  the  law. 

The  ideal  of  social  harmony  is,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself." — It  is  founded  upon  that  other  idea 
of  one  parental  stock  and  one  origin  of  man.  Thus  God, 
sole  king,  the  people  a  unit,  one  country,  same  patriarchs, 
same  interests,  rights,  duties,  chances  and  equal  wealth,  all 
deeply  moored  in  the  emancipating  Sabbath,  the  inalienable 
family-lot,  the  ever  nivellating  and  renovating  economics  : 
the  Year  of  Release  and  the  Jubilee — these  are  the  leading 
ideas  of  the  biblical  legislation. 


REFLECTED   IN   THE   TALMUD. 


Reflected  in  the  Talmud. 


235 


These  principles  liave  been  fairly  kept  alive  by  succeed- 
ing ag-es,  leaders  and  teachers,  on  the  whole.  The  Talmud- 
ists,  the  Casuists  and  the  Moralists  have  fairly  elaborated 
that  biblical  ideal  of  State  and  people,  not  in  its  minute 
practical  details,  but  in  its  ethical  features.  In  spite  of  their 
vicissitudes  of  fortune,  the  amount  of  hate  and  suffering, 
unparalleled  in  history,  they  have  never  deserted  their  task 
nor  their  people.  That  noble  example  of  adherence,  of 
unflinching  perseverance,  through  a  long  line  of  centuries 
and  generations  of  martyrs,  is  as  unparalleled  as  that  of  their 
sufferings.  It  will  remain  a  tli  eme  of  admiration  to  posterity. 
This  seems  to  have  been  the  secret  of  their  strength.  Why 
their  followers  remained  true  to  them?  It  was  their 
unflinching  trust  in  the  cause;  and  next,  their  self-sacrifice, 
which  won  the  respect  and  adherence  of  the  masses.  In 
our  times  both,  cause  and  effect,  have  disappeared;  will 
they  ever  reappear  ? — 

By  that  phalanx  of  martyrs  the  leading  ideas  and  ideals 
of  Mosaism  have  been  fairly  kept  up,  often  times,  pure  and 
unalloyed — a  marvelous  phenomenon  in  the  history  of  two 
thousand  years'  legislation.  Pure  Monotheism  has  been 
retained  to  this  day  at  such  an  enormous  sacrifice  and 
under  such  tremendous  temptations. — So  has  been  the 
belief  in  the  unity  of  the  human  race,  its  doctrine  and  its 
final  goal,  in  spite  of  mountains  of  prejudice.  "Thou  shalt 
love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  prominently  culminating  as 
the  climax  of  the  noble  19th  chapter  of  Leviticus,  was  duly 
emphasized  and  conscientiously  declared  by  them  as  the 
central  doctrine  and  "essence  of  the  law." — So  it  was  by 
Hillel,  adding :  "  What  thou  wilt  not  be  done  unto  thee,  do 
not  unto  thy  neighbor."  (Sabbath,  31  a.) — It  was  repeated 
by  Akiba  (Sifra  Kedoshim  IV,  12.)  It  is  declared  such  in 
the  New  Testament  by  Jesus.    It  i  s  so  by  all  later  moralists. — 


236  SPIRIT    OF    THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

"All  men  are  in  the  image  of  God;  lience  their  lives, 
dij^nity,  rights,  duties,  are  holy,  all  men  being  but  one  race, 
all  brothers,"  (Ibid.)  is  deduced  by  an  old  teacher  from  the 
verse :  "  This  is  the  book  of  the  generations  of  men."  (^) 
This  he  declares  "  the  first  cardinal  principle." — "All  the 
righteous  among  the  Gentile  nations  will  share  in  eternal 
bliss,"  is  a  well-known  Talmudical  doctrine. — All  practical 
duties,  as  respect,  love,  benevolence,  justice,  truth,  etc.,  the 
Talmudists,  in  Halachali  and  Agadah,  without  exception, 
enjoin  upon  their  adherents  to  practice  toward  Gentiles, 
without  asking  for  their  creed  or  race  or  country. — From 
Jeremiah(2),  who  enjoined  it  upon  the  Babylonian  exiles,  to 
this  day,  patriotism  to  country,  just  as  love,  forbearance, 
justice,  etc.,  toward  our  fellow-citizens,  are  emphasized  and 
taught  by  Jewish  moralists  and  Talmudists.  The  proofs 
are  given  above  in  all  detail. 

Thus  has  been  upheld  the  great  prophetic  Messiah-ideal 
concerning  the  eternal  progress  of  the  human  race,  that 
once  the  nations  will  stop  their  wars  and  jealousies,  that 
through  knowledge  and  wisdom  united  they  will  form  but 
one  people,  prnctice  one  right  and  worship  one  God.  This 
is  the  combined  sense  of  the  identical  ideal  in  Isaiah  II  and 
XI  and  Michah  IV. 

Aims  of  the  Biblical  Scheme. 

The  biblical  scheme  is  vast  and  profound;  it  is  both 
practical  and  theoretical,  realistic  and  ideal.  We  have  but 
to  take  as  an  instance  the  great  Decalogue  and  the  nine- 
teenth chapter  of  Leviticus,  and  we  shall  soon  be  aware  of 
this.  First,  it  lays  down  the  rule  that  the  laws  are  simply 
for  practical  good.  (Ill  M.  18,  5):  "Ye  shall  observe  my 
statutes  and  judgments  which  a  man  shall  perforin,  and 
live  hy  theTn." — It  has  little  or  no  dogma,  no  special  creed, 

(1)    Genesis  V,  1. 
(3)    Jeremiah  39,7. 


AIMS   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   SCHEME.  237 

no  mystic  teachings — though  a  great  deal  of  practical  sym- 
bolism, as  in  the  Orient.  It  lays  all  stress  upon  active 
morality,  upon  purity  and  sincerity,  justice  and  right-living. 
But  it  aims  jnst  as  much  at  the  practical  well-being,  at 
individual,  bodily  happiness.  It  promises  earthly,  divine 
blessings  for  right-living.  Right  conduct  vrill  insure  a  joy- 
ous, long  and  happy  existence.  The  rights  of  the  mind  and 
of  the  flesh  are  equally  noticed.  It  goes  so  far  as  to  make 
even  external,  physical  nature  depend  upon  the  morality  of 
its  votaries.  It  promises  (V  M.  2. ) — "  Rain  and  sunshine, 
peace  and  plenty,  as  the  revt^ard  for  obeying  Jahveh."  Thus, 
the  aim  of  the  Bible  religion  is  in  first  instance,  morality 
and  happiness.  They  appear  to  Mosaism  but  one  thing,  one 
and  inter-dependent ;  neither  can  exist  alone. — A  life  pleas- 
ing to  Jahveh  will  be  moral  at  one  pole  and  happy  at  the 
other.  The  Roman  stoics  cared  alone  for  correct  conduct ; 
virtue  was  their  ^'summuTn  honum.''''  The  neo-Platonic  phil- 
osophers aimed  at  ecstacy,  or  absorption  in  God.  The 
Greek  popular  ideal  was  military  glory;  the  Greek  philoso- 
phers' ideal  was  knowledge  and  truth.  The  Roman  ideal 
was  patriotism.  The  Mosaic  scheme  labored  for  morality 
and  happiness ;  for  health,  peace,  plenty,  progeny,  etc.;  these 
were  the  necessary  results  of  a  noble  and  pure  life ;  wor- 
ship of  God  was  chiefly  love  to  man.  So  psalmists  and 
prophets  seem  often  to  imply  religion  as  wholly  absorbed 
by  justice  and  charity,  by  purity  and  modesty ;  and  these  go 
with  happiness. 

Yet  it  is  not  wholly  so,  when  deeply  looked  into  the 
system.  The  Bible  religion  is  more  than  morality.  It  has 
its  own  and  proper  sphere.  Not  practical  equity  and 
happiness  is  its  final  goal ;  no,  it  aims  higher,  at  ^'■Holy 
shall  ye  ie,  for  lioly  am  I,  your  GodP — Here  is  the 
noble  idealism,  the  hoary,  oriental  mysticism,  ever  rooting 
at  the  bottom  of  human  hearts.  Religion  is  the  striving 
for  God ;  to  imitate,  to  reach,  to  identify  ourselves  with  the 


238  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

Divine,  to  achieve  perfection.  Behold !  Frail,  shortcoming, 
one-day  creatures  that  we  are,  we  yet  dream  of  and  labor 
to  know  all,  embrace  all,  reach  all:  happiness,  glory, beauty, 
wisdom,  holiness,  perfection.  "  To  be  as  God."  (I.  M.  22). — 
This  ideal  is  the  grandest,  the  noblest,  the  divine  in  the 
human,  the  image  of  the  Deity  in  our  soul,  the  reflex  of  the 
Creator  in  the  individual  creature,  the  universe  mirrored  in 
man,  its  thinking  miniature.  This  is  the  higher  ideal,  the 
mysticism  of  religion,  self-perfection  in  the  highest  degree ; 
this  is :  "  Holy  shall  ye  he,  for  holy  am  /,  your  God  J' 

This  is  elucidated  in  chapter  XIX  of  Leviticus,  first  as 
practical  right-conduct,  next  as  ideal  goodness,  culminating 
in  God-likeness,  in  striving  to  reach  divine  perfection, 
divine  holiness.  This  ideal  is  further  elaborated  by  psalm- 
ists, prophets  and  later  teachers.  Read  each  of  these  liter- 
atures carefully,  and  you  will  find  this  manifold  character 
reflected;  very  realistic  and  yet  sublimely  ideal.  From 
Deuteronomy  it  runs  through  prophets,  Halachah  and 
Agadah  undismayed  at  the  havoc  of  times.  Will  that 
idealism  outlive  the  present  "  blood  and  iron  policy  f  " 

Some  such  ideal  apparently  is  depicted  in  the  mystic 
personality  of  the  Messiah,  or  Adam  Kadmon,  born  before 
creation,  the  Demiourg  of  Talmud  and  Midrashim  and 
Kabbalah;  next  in  the  hoary  patriarch,  Abraham,  his 
efforts,  his  results,  his  doctrine,  his  worldly  success  and  his 
family  happiness ;  that  is  expressed  in:  'Mahveh  blessed 
Abraham  with  all "  (^)  on  which  the  Midrash  expatiates  in 
that  sense ;  such  an  ideal,  God-like  man  is  to  the  Jew  Moses 
who  died  with  all  his  faculties  unimpaired;  who  passed 
over  to  immortality  with  his  glance  intent  upon  the  prom- 
ised land,  from  the  sublime  Pisgah-height  (-j ;  or  Elijah,  after 
a  formidable  straggle  against  idolatry  and  sensuality,  dis- 
appearing in  the  clouds,  snatched  away  to  ethereal  life. 

(1)    Genesis  XXIV,  1. 
(3)    Deut.  34,  1  to  8. 


AIMS    OF   THE   BIBLICAL   SCHEME.  239 

Socrates  was  thought  such  in  Greece,  cheerfully  drinkinjjr 
the  cup  of  hemlock,  unjustly  forced  upon  him  by  the  State  ; 
such  wai?  the  Sage  of  Plato's  republic,  alone  entitled  to  rule 
in  the  name  of  the  gods;  such  does  the  pious  Christian 
imagine  Jesus,  his  sublime  and  ideal  God-man,  dying  with 
the  prayer  upon  his  lips:  "Pardon!  O  father,  thy  children, 
they  know  not  what  they  are  doing."  Such  do  thinkers 
imagine  Spinoza,  living  and  bearing  without  a  murmur,  and 
dying  without  regret;  ever  even-tempered  and  cheerful. 
"  For  all  must  be ;  '  all  that  is,  is  good.'  "  "All  comes  from 
God ;  ami  God  is  the  Ever-goodJ^ 

The  neo-Platonic  ecstacy  and  the  Hindoo  Nirvana,  we 
commonly  conceive  as  identical  with  self-annihilation.  The 
biblical  ^^  Holy  shall  ye  he^^  seems  to  be  more  self-conscious. 
And  even  so  is  the  Rabbinic  ideal  of  the  highest  beatitude,  or 
paradise.  They  say :  "  The  righteous  are  sitting  there, 
radiating  with  glory  and  beholding  the  splendors  of  the 
Shechinah;^^  to  which  Maimonides  adds:  "They  recognize 
truth  in  all  its  reality." — Thus,  highest  mentality,  embrac- 
ing all,  based  upon  morality  and  happiness,  seems  to  be  the 
ideal  and  aim  of  all  Biblic  and  Talmudic  religion.  That 
is  "termed:  holiness  and  perfection.  The  Sohar,  the  lead- 
ing book  of  the  Kabbalah,  often  spreads  out  its  bright- 
colored  wings  towards  that  ideal.  But  it  is  such  already  in 
the  Psalmist,  15 :  "  Who  is  to  ascend  the  mount  of  the 
liord?"  answering:  "The  pure,  the  good,  the  truthful,  the 
unflinching,  etc.,  etc." 
.  There  are  some  claims  and  discussions  about  differences 
in  the  systems  of  Abraham,  of  Moses,  of  Prophetism, 
Talmud,  etc.  Such  claims  have  a  scant  foundation.  All  the 
above-mentioned  ideas  and  ideals  are  but  one  continuous 
development,  without  any  real  break  or  discrepancy,  less 
yet  a  contradiction,  or  even  antagonism.  They  are  develop- 
ments from  Abrahamism  to  Mosaism,  to  Prophetism  and  to 
the  best  of  Rabbinism.     Any  discrepancy  there  is  not  the 


240  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION, 

conscious  result  of  the  teacher's  change  of  front,  but  rather 
a  sad  echo  of  the  times  and  conditions.  Barbarous  times 
and  treatment  had  their  counteraction  among  the  Ebrews, 
and  such  times  emphasized  more  creed  and  ceremonies 
within  and  prejudice  without.  The  Ebrew  nationality 
harshly  treated,  most  naturally  thought  harshly  of  its 
persecutors ;  and  the  more  it  was  attacked,  the  more  it  had 
to  intrench  itself  behind  forms  and  observances.  Liberal 
times  laid  most  stress  upon  deeds  and  principles.  Thus, 
there  is  no  real  break  in  those  systems.  They  are  but  the 
natural  evolutions  of  one  from  the  other. 

The  Bible  and  the  Present. — Conclusion. 

Having  carefully  studied  the  legislation  of  the  great 
Book,  let  us  now  examine  what  does  the  present  State  and 
Society  owe  to  that  system  and  what  to  other  sources ;  what 
elements  of  the  present  civilization  derive  from  Judaea  and 
what  from  Greece  and  Rome  and  their  predecessors,  Assyria, 
Persia,  Phoenicia  or  Egypt;  what  modern  manners,  feelings 
and  views  come  from  classical  and  what  from  biblical 
impressions. 

No  doubt  our  present  society  rests  upon  a  solid  biblicSal 
foundation.  The  ideas  of  God,  duty  and  righteousness 
underlie  our  community,  at  least  as  an  ideal.  That  God- 
ideal  is  Monotheism ;  and  righteousness,  not  force,  is  the 
sequel ;  both  are  biblic.  Our  modern  religions  are  monothe- 
istic. Polytheism,  apparently,  is  dead  among  educated 
people. 

The  next  principle  is  morality,  or  the  doctrine  of  the 
golden  rule,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself." — In 
theory  that  is  the  base  of  our  society,  and  it  is  biblical, 
Old-  and  New-Testamentary. — But  in  reality,  in  grand 
outlines,  in  politics,  statecraft  stands  upon  egoism,  force 
and  taking  advantage. — The  present  condition  of  Europe, 
its  huge  standing  armies,  its  late  and  its  latent  wars,  its 


THE    BIBLE    AND   THE    PRESENT.  241 

"  Pan-Latinism,  Slavism  and  Germanism,"  as  well  as  our  own 
would-be  '' Pan- Americanism "  and  our  "silver"  dilemma, 
prove  it  sufficiently ;  and  that  hails  from  heathen  Rome 
and  Greece. 

The  best  part  of  our  present  religions  derives  from  the 
Sacred  Writ. — Regular  worship,  or  popular  yearning  for  the 
good  and  the  holy,  with  the  Sabbath  and  holidays,  epochs 
of  great  moral,  political  and  historical  import,  utilized  for 
ideal  and  refining  purposes,  come  from  that  same  source. 
The  pattern  thereof  we  find  only  in  Judaea.  Elsewhere 
public  worship  was  a  State  contrivance. 

Next  our  idea  of  pan-humanity  can  originate  only  in  that 
of  pan-deity  and  unity  of  creation,  with  their  sequels  of 
justice,  philanthropy,  fraternity,  freedom,  equality,  human 
dignity,  one  race,  one  interest,  same  rights  and  duties ;  no 
poligamy,  no  slavery ;  woman  the  equal  and  companion  of 
man;  no  ruling  and  no  serving-races, — all  these  are  the 
logical  outcome  of  Monotheism,  never  of  Greek,  Roman  or 
Oriental  Polytheism. 

From  the  Bible  is  next  hailing  our  "  sweet  home,"  family, 
marriage,  conjugal  and  filial  piety;  because  there  woman 
is  an  ^?)(?,  not  a  Pandora.  There  she  is  the  "helpmeet,'' 
the  mother  of  life,  to  bless  man,  not  to  ruin.  The  pattern 
of  womanhood  was  low,  even  in  Greece  and  Rome,  not  only 
in  Babel  and  Assyria.  Force  was  there,  yet  the  measure  of 
worth  and  virtue  was  a  manly  epithet.  Woman  and  family 
rose  alone  with  the  Bible. 

The  full  idea  of  property  I  must  likewise  vindicate  to 
the  great  Book.  There  alone  is  work  consecrated  and  ren- 
dered noble.  In  Greece,  Rome  and  the  East,  with  Arabs, 
Teutons  and  Mongols,  was  conquest  the  supreme  source  of 
acquisition,  and  conquest  is  shifting;  it  is  a  poor  founda- 
tion for  property.  Work  alone  is  its  solid  base.  With 
property  and  work,  iMosaism  consecrated  thrift,  effort  and 
individuality. 


242  SPIRIT    OF   THE    BIBLICAL    LEGISLATION. 

So  it  is  with  truthfulness,  sincerity,  honesty,  veracity, 
pity. — The  Greek  gods  and  heroes  were  not  distinguished 
for  any  of  these  qualities. 

So  are  our  noblest  social  features  biblical ;  democracy,  or 
popular  government,  the  citizen  as  the  aim  and  object,  not 
the  pedestal  of  the  State ;  the  magistrate  as  the  brother  and 
oflB^cer,  not  the  despot,  of  the  people ;  enjoyment,  happiness 
and  education  at  the  reach  of  all,  is  biblical. 

So  is  the  best  and  soundest  part  of  socialism.  Land  is 
the  property  of  all;  each  is  entitled  to  his  share — his  family- 
lot.  No  one  is  born  for  pauperism,  nor  for  proletarianism ; 
equal  chances  for  all,  and  for  none  privileges;  no  over- 
reaching, nor  taking  advantage  of  the  distressed ;  no  land- 
grabbing  and  no  plutocracy;  no  born  nobles  and  no  mob; 
solidarity  and  community  of  interests  among  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  community ;  altruism  and  not  crushing  competi- 
tion— all  that  is  biblical  doctrine.  Whilst  it  is  united  there 
with  religion,  family,  property  and  individuality,  which 
some  socialists  unreasonably  repudiate. 

From  the  ancient  Greek  philosophers  and  sages  present 
society  derives  the  noble  tastes  and  cravings  for  exact 
knowledge,  careful  study,  close  observation,  discrimination 
and  criticism ;  to  learn  by  experiment  and  trial,  to  follow 
the  steps  of  nature,  to  search  for  each  effect  its  adequate 
cause,  not  to  rely  upon  authority  and  blind  imitation,  not 
to  account  by  an  a  priori  hypothesis  or  "  deus-ex-macMna  " 
assumption,  but  rather  by  inductive  methods,  by  watching 
the  workings  of  nature  and  generalizing  its  laws.  Hence  all 
exact  sciences,  all  fine  arts,  all  practical  trades  and  crafts, 
nearly  all  about  mechanics,  solidity  and  beauty  in  forms  and 
esthetics,  all  accurate  mathematical  knowledge,  the  method 
of  beginning  with  doubt,  advancing  by  observation  and 
arriving  at  knowledge  by  verification,  that  adhering  to 
scientific  truth,  above  all  authority  and  preconceived  theo- 
ries, all  that  is  of  Phoenician  and  Egyptian,  especially  of 


THE    BIBLE    AND    THE    PRESENT.  243 

Greek  orijs^in ;  the  modern  elements  thereof  may  be  retraced 
by  derivation  to  Hellenic  methods ;  Aristotle  coming  before 
Bacon  and  Darwin. 

The  useful  elements  of  present  society  coming  from  Rome 
and  her  predecessors  are  government  and  legislation.  To 
assimilate  and  form  divers  units  and  petty  tribes  into  one 
compound,  political  society,  to  turn  clans  and  masses  into 
organized  civilized  bodies,  by  persuasion  or  by  compulsion, 
by  cunning  or  by  wisdom,  by  law  or  by  force,  by  good  means 
or  by  foul  means,  to  show  the  useful  (?)  part  which  "  Mood 
and  iron "  play  in  human  affairs ;  the  art  of  government. 
State-craft,  war  and  legislation,  we  moderns  have  learned 
from  Rome  and  Nineveh,  Babel  and  Persia. 

From  Greek  and  Roman  and  Asian  paganism,  we  have 
yet  our  lingering  remnants  of  Polytheism,  our  very  numer- 
ous, popular  superstitions  and  our  dogmatic  crudities; 
further,  the  present  unprincipled  politics;  cynicism,  private 
and  public;  hypocrisy  in  State  and  in  Church,  bloody 
dynastic  ambitions,  heartless  competition,  tyranny  of  race 
and  creed ;  selfishness,  violence  and  over-reaching ;  reckless 
sensuality ;  demagogism,  small  and  great,  careless  of  conse- 
quences ;  civil,  social  and  international  wars ;  altruism  in 
church  and  egoism  in  the  world  ;  "  Love  thy  neighbor  "  in 
theory,  and  "  Ruin  thy  neighbor,"  in  practice,  they  hail 
from  that  quarter,  decaying  Greece  and  Rome. 

It  is  not  easy  to  classify  all  the  present  social  features. 
It  is  harder  yet  to  weigh  their  import.  But  it  seems  that 
most  of  our  communities'  best  moral  and  social  elements 
derive  from  the  Bible,  and  most  of  its  worst  traits  hail  from 
declining  Hellas  and  Italy  and  their  Asiatic  predecessors. 

It  appears  that  duty,  righteousness  and  morals,  men 
learned  from  Judsea;  exact  knowledge  was  imparted  by 
Greece.  The  first  ever  points  to  supernatural  guidance. 
The  latter  teaches  self-reliance.  Noble  inspirations,  and 
great   moral   thoughts  mankind  derived   from  Jerusalem; 


244  SPIKIT   OF   THE   BIBLICAL   LEGISLATION. 

exact  scientific  truth  and  methods  from  Athens ;  bold  initia- 
tive from  classic  Rome.  Our  head  turns  towards  refined 
Hellas ;  our  hold  hand  towards  Patrician  Rome,  and  our 
heart  and  feelings  towards  Judsea.  As  our  feelings  have 
the  strongest  hold,  as  the  heart  is  most  concerned  in  our 
deeds,  even  such  is  the  hold  of  the  Sacred  Book  upon 
present  society.  Believers  or  not,  it  influences  them.  It 
is  the  ethical  pulse  thereof,  though  not  by  far  yet  the  norm 
of  deeds.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  leading  moral  aspira- 
tions and  noblest  instincts  of  our  modern  civilization,  in 
Church,  State  and  home,  mankind  has  derived  from  the 
Bible;  and  there  is  merit  enough. 

True,  we  Americans,  have  yet  our  "  silver  question,"  and 
Europe  its  "Pan-Latin-Slav — and  Germanism."  True  the 
forum  and  the  curia,  the  market  and  politics  are  yet 
heathen,  selfishness  being  there  dominant.  Yet  we  may 
fairly  hope  that  common  sense  and  exact  science,  that 
nature's  promptings,  ripe  reflection  and  the  advancing  influ- 
ence of  mankind's  great  Book,  will  succeed  in  making  the 
doctrine  of  *'Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  a 
full  and  substantial  reality. 

The  End. 


COMMENTS  ON  THE  AUTHOR'S  PUBLICATIONS. 


"Spirit   of  the  Biblical  Legislation.'^ 

The  Baltimore  Sun  in  last  June,  brought  out  the  prospectus  of 
this  work.  So  did  other  papers  in  the  East  and  West.  Among  the 
first  encouraging  letters  with  subscriptions  were  those  from  his 
Eminence,  Cardinal  Gibbons,  Honorables  Attorney-G-eneral  J.  P. 
Poe,  Charles  J,  Bonaparte,  L.  N.  Hopkins,  Baltimore;  Attorney- 
General  S.  N.  Eosedale,  Jacob  H.  Shiff,  New  York;  leading  min- 
isters and  laymen,  booksellers,  congregations  followed. 

Advanced  sheets  have  been  submitted  to  leading  scholars,  and 
their  opinions  were  unanimous  that:  "The  book  is  highly  interest- 
ing and  important,  fully  deserving  public  attention.''  Such  are  the 
replies,  among  many  others,  by  the  Eev.  Drs.  Edavard  A.  Law- 
rence, Eutaw  Congregational  Church;  J.  T.  Wightman",  McOul- 
loh  Methodist  Episcopal  Church;  H.  M.  Wharton,  Brantly  Baptist 
Church;  C.  A.  Fulton,  North  Avenue  Immanuel  Baptist  Church; 
P.  H.  Pullman,  Guilford  Avenue  Universalist  Church;  Dr.  Clam- 
pett,  Druid  Hill  Avenue  Episcopal  Church,  an^  Dr.  A.  Frieden- 
WALD,  Physician,  North  Eutaw  street. 

The  Cincinnati  American  Is.  published  in  1888,  two  lectures 
by  the  author  on  that  theme,  delivered  at  the  H.  Union  College, 
with  Resolutions  of  thanJcs  voted  him.  The  Book  will  prove  inter- 
esting and  useful  to  the  general  reader,  as  well  as  to  professionals. 
The  author  and  proprietor's  address  is : 

Rev.  MAURICE  ELUEGEL, 

2041  Division  Street, 

Baltimore,  Md. 


246 


COMMENTS. 


The  Author's  "Thoughts  on  Religious  Rites  and  Views"  received 
the  cordial  acknowledgmeut  of  many  scientists,  writers,  divines 
and   leading   Universities   in   America  and  Europe.      So  writes: 

President  W.  H.  Green,  of  Princeton.  ''The  book  seems  to 
embody,  in  an  interesting  way,  the  results  of  extensive  reading, 
study  and  careful  reflection." 

President  Andrew  D.  White,  of  Cornell:  "It  interests  me  very 
much  in  my  hurried  examination  of  it." 

President  Day,  of  Yale,  had  a  continued  correspondence  on  it, 
desiring  the  author  to  write  on  kindred  themes. 

Friedrich  von  Bodenstedt,  German  poet:  ''I  have  read  your 
thoughtful  tract  with  lively  interest,  and  marked  many  passages 
to  talk  over  with  you.  I  find  in  it  so  much  instruction  and  sug- 
gestion."' 

Professor  Franz  Delitzsch,  of  the  Leipsic  University:  ''It  is 
likely  to  prove  a  real  enrichment  of  science:"  and  later:  "It  is  a 
little  book,  rich  in  contents,  and  offering  much  material  for 
reflection." 

Professor  W.  Wundt,  of  the  same  University:  "Taking  great 
interest  in  the  history  of  manners  and  customs,  your  historical 
researches  are  calculated  to  vividly  interest  me."  Again:  "I  shall 
utilize  your  remarks  in  my  studies  on  Spinoza,  with  reference  to 
Maimonides." 

Professor  A.  Neubauer,  of  Oxford  University,  England: 
"Hearty  thanks  for  your  interesting  work,  which  I  have  just  fin- 
ished reading.  I  shall  lend  it  to  Dr.  Mills,  of  New  York,  who 
is  writing  on  the  Avesta  and  the  Vedas,  etc." 

The  Right  Hon.  W.  E.  Gladstone,  London:  "It  appears  to  be 
of  great  interest.  Examining  into  the  character  of  the  Mosaic 
system,  compared  with  others,  all  that  throws  light  on  this 
subject  is  very  loelcome  to  me." 


COMMENTS.  247 

Cardinal  Gibbons,  Baltimore,  sent  his  good  wishes  for  its 
success. 

The  Chief  Eabbi,  Dr.  Zadoc  Kahn,  of  France:  "I  have  read 
your  charming  little  book  with  as  much  pleasure  as  with  profit.'^ 

Dr.  (Schwartz,  Land-Rabbi  of  Baden:  "With  great  pleasure 
have  1  read  already  many  fine  things  therein.^' 

The  Author's  "Mosaic  Diet  and  Hygiene:"  "Attracted  con- 
siderable notice,  in  Germany  especially.^^ 

Professor  Dr.  Gratz,  of  Breslau,  writes:  "It  pleases  me  very 
much     .     .     ,     and  I  request  you  to  let  me  keep  the  copy."' 

Dr.  H.  Abler,  Chief  Rabbi  of  England;  Dr.  Isadore  Loeb, 
of  Paris;  Dr.  G.  Gottheil,  New  York,  and  others  cordially 
approved  of  it. 

Many  European  and  American  periodicals  reproduced  or  epito- 
mized the  above. 

Smaller  publications,  as  "  Belus'  Tower,"  and  the  "  Two 
Philosophies,"  were  cordially  endorsed  by  Professors  D.  Fricke 
and  Franz  Delitzsch,  of  the  Leipsic  University. 

Professor  Gratz  writes:  "Your  polemics:  'Shylock'  and 
'Prejudice,'  are  beautiful.  In  our  country  one  can  not  speak  so 
plainly." 

In  1877  Hon.  W.  E.  Gladstone  wrote:  "Rev.  FluegeFs  arti- 
cles, '  The  Ottoman  Empire,'  gave  me  unqualified  pleasure. 
I  am  desirous  of  expressing  my  gratification  to  him." 

Two  letters  by  Lord  Beaconsfield  (1878),  acknowledge  the 
receipt  of  his  articles  on  that  topic. 

President  Garfield  and  Secretary  Evarts  sent  thanks  for 
interesting  articles  on  the  same. 

Ad.  Cremieux,  the  French  statesman  (1877):  "Your  articles 
on  the  Oriental  Question  have  been  much  remarked  by  our 
committee." 


248  COMMENTS. 

Rev.  Henky  W.  Beecher  (1869):  "I  congratulate  you  upon 
your  having  acquired  such  a  command  of  the  English  language. 
Your  work  might  make  many  a  native  proud. ^^ 

Rev.  Dr.  S.  Abler,  New  York  (1887):  "I  gladly  acknowledge 
your  earnest  sense  of  research." 

Rev.  Dr.  Hubsch,  New  York  (1875):  "Your  Hyhsos  article 
proves  your  profound  studies.  I  am  ever  ready  to  listen  to  your 
excellent  remarks." 

Dr.  L.  Philippson  commented,  flatteringly,  in  the  Allgemeine 
Zeitung,  on  "The  United  States'  Credo.'' 

Hon.  Carl  Schurz,  recently:  "Your  sketches  of  'G-ermany' 
are  most  instructive  and  interesting." 

So  was  the  "Reply  to  Prof.  Fr.  Delitzsch,"  cordially  received  by 
scientific  and  laymen. 


Spirit  of  the  Biblical  Legislation,  single  copy $2.00 

Thoughts  on  Religious  Rites,  "         "    .75 

Mosaic  Diet  and  Hygiene,  "         "    .50 

Address : 

Rev.  M.  FLUEGEL, 

Baltimore,  Md. 


DATE  DUE                           1 

^P^''ii'^-  \ 

54, 

gwaaja 

V 

» 

^^^^HiJ^ 

-—^^^^mmm 

',q^ 

^,00^ 

hWUP"' 

-**~-^ 

CAYLOKO 

BS1199.L3F6 

Spirit  of  the  Biblical  legislations 


Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1012  00051   5132 


